Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-14-1992 Council PacketMINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 ROLL The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Peterson, CounciImembers J. Diann Goetten, Gabriel Jabbour, Edward Callahan and Mary Butler. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Ron Moorse, Public Works Director John Gerhardson, Finance Director Tom Kuehn, Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning AdminIstrator Michael Gaffron, Police Chief Stephen Sullivan, City Attorney Thomas Barrett, City Engineer Glenn Cook and City Recorder Teri Naab. Stephen Peterson was present to represent the Planning Commission. Mayor Peterson cal led the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. (#1) CONSENT AGENDA Jabbour added Items #14, 15, and 16, and removed Item #33. Callahan removed Items #23, 24, 25, 28, 29 and 38. Butler added Items #19 and 20. Mayor Peterson removed Item #35. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, Consent Agenda as amended. Ayes 5, nays 0. to approve the Motions for all items adopted by consent agenda will be inc'u’ed In the minutes in their respective numerical order. (*#2, 344) APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Council held on November 23, 1992; the minutes of the Truth in Taxation Meeting of December 1, 1992; and the Special Meeting of December 1, 1992. Ayes 5, nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS There was no report. LONG LAKE FIRE DEPARTMENT REPORT There was no report. PUBLIC COMMENTS Frank St.Lawrence, 250 Cygnet Place, stated the new facility was great and thanked the Council for all its efforts. 1 4 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 PUBLIC COMMENTS - CONT. Mayor Peterson thanked Mark Bernhardson for his efforts regarding the facility. She introduced ShirIey Bonine, Hennepin County Parks CommissI oner. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#5) ORDINANCE REVISION - BUSINESS & JOINT USE OF LAKE FACILITIES - SECTION 5.42 (REVISED), SECTION 5.43 (ADD) Gaffron explained he drafted an amendment to the ordinance per the Lake Use Committee’s recommendations separating the joint use dock license from the marina business license section. It was later suggested by Callahan that the wording be considered further, and In the Interim, revise the existing ordinance by removing from the license section the land use sections duplicated within the zoning ordI nances. Callahan stated the problem staff has with the issuance of many marina licenses is the lack of compliance with land use issues, which are already addressed within the zoning section of the ordI nance. Butler asked If the interim ordinance is adopted, would the Counci I need to revisit the issue at a later date. Callahan stated they would need to revisit the issue. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Butler, to table action on this matter to the January 25th meeting. Ayes 5, nays 0. («#6) #1706 WILLIAM & EVELYN KNAPP, 4300 BAYSIDE ROAD - FINAL SUBDIVISION/PRD - RESOLUTION #3210 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3210 for Application #1706 for William and Evelyn Knapp of 4300 Bayside Road, approving the plat of Cristofori Woods and granting a conditional use permit. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#7) #1749 JIM LAWRENCE, 1550 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - FINAL SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION #3211 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3211 for AppiIcation #1749, Jim Lawrence, 1550 Sixth Avenue North, approving the plat of Tanglewood Second Addition. Ayes 5, nays 0. i MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 (#8) #1762 PAUL BOYKE, 793 NORTH FERNDALE ROAD - PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL - RESOLUTION #3212 Paul Boyke was present. Gaffron explained this Is a request for a two lot subdivision of a 4 acre parcel. Both lots satisfy the standards of the septic code. A cul-de-sac exists east of the property from which a private driveway will be provided to serve both lots. The Planning Commission recommended approval on a 5-1 vute. The minority opinion objected because of the shape of the homestead lot. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3212, #1762 Paul Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road, granting preliminary plat approval. Ayes 5, nays 0. Mayor Peterson asked If the configuration of the iot was common. Gaffron stated it is unusual, but is allowed to exist based on the requirements for measuring lakeshore and non-iakeshore lots widths. (#9) #1768/#1786 DR. WILLIAM R. & RHONDA T. OMLIE, 1860 SHADYWOOD ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCES Rhonda 0mlie and Ken Larson were present. Mabusth reviewed that at a previous meeting the Councii approved a side setback variance to extend the garage along the same line as the existing garage. Yhe noted the conditionai use permit Is requested for excess fill for the drive and turnaround improvements. The variances also are requested for add!tional deck, patio and walkways. The original proposal showed hardcover In the 75-250’ zone at 31 .4X, which has now been reduced to 30.7%. She noted the additional filling requires the use of geotechnical fabric to prevent erosion and retaining walls resulting in additional hardcover. Butler felt the project to be very ambitious for the property and felt the amount of hardcover proposed was excessive. She indicated the hardships presented do not justify the hardcover increases. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Jabbour, to table AppIications #1768 and #1786 for Dr. William R. and Rhonda T. 0ml Ie, 1860 Shadywood Road, to allow the applicants time to reconsider their proposal. Ayes 5, nays 0. --- .. - - resolution #3212 a request for a two lot subdivision of standards of the septic »ast of the property from which a private Jd to serve both lots. The Planning niinority opinion ape of the homestead lot. Goetten, to adopt Resolution , 793 North Ferndale Road, granting Ayes 5, nays 0. e configuration of the lot was common. il. but is allowed to exist based on the lakeshore and non-Iakeshore lots widths. R. * RHONDA T. OMLIE, [ANCES 1 were present. previous meeting the Council approved extend the garage along the same line e noted the conditional use permit js II for the drive and turnaround also are requested for additional deck, ginal proposal showed hardcover in the ch has now been reduced to 30.7X. she ing requires the use of geotechnical 1 and retaining walls resulting in be very ambitious for the property and proposed was excessive. She indicated not justify the hardcover increases. Dnded by Jabbour, to table Applications iiliam R. and Rhonda T. 0ml le, i860 e applicants time to reconsider their MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETINGHELD DECEMBER 14, 1992ZONING FILES #1768 & 1786 - CONT. Larson asked what, if any, percentage of hardcover variance the Council would consider. Butler suggested the appiicants revise their proposal, reducing the hardcover percentage as much as humanly possible to meet the guidelines of the City. (#10) #1775 ROBERT D. LUESSE, 3249 CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3213 Robert Luesse was present. Mabusth explained, per the Planning Commission recommendation, the appIicant revised his proposal by attaching the garage and reducing the size of the garage addition now at 22’x24’, but at the same time made the structure an oversized structure. The Planning Commission did not approve the 6’x8’ greenhouse addition. In exchange for the two story I5’x16 1/2’ lakeside addition, the Planning Commission asked that the deck on the north side of the structure be removed and replaced with a smaller entry deck. Mabusth noted the original propr al called for 37.2X hardcover and the revised proposal is at 29.4/v. Jabbour felt this proposal an improvement to the property. He felt the applicant followed the directive of the Planning Commission after their first meeting and should be allowed the green house. Stephen Peterson stated the applicant did follow the directives of the Planning Commission, but added the Planning Commission does not get into redesigning an application at the meeting. Butler felt the applicant should not be penalized for following dIrectIons. letter sent by Mr. LuesseGoetten referred to the compelling expressing environmental concerns. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3213, #1775 for Robert D. Luesse, 3249 Casco Circle, approving variances for a garage addition at 28’x22’, and approving the 6’x8’ greenhouse, amending the resolution to reflect the approvals. Ayes 5, nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 (#11) #1777 JOHN THIESSE, 3845 BAYSIDE ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3214 John Thiesse was present. Mabusth explained this property is next to the outlot for Bayside Landing. The current proposal is for a second story addition to be installed over the existing single story residence and an intensification of the existing deck by enclosing a portion of the deck. The improvements require hardcover variances and setback variances. She noted no views will be Impacted by the enclosed section of the deck because of the curved shoreline. The proposal shows removals of non-structural hardcover reducng the hardcover from 50.4* to 45*. She referred to a letter from the neighboring property owner to the east expressing concern with the substandard side setback. Thiesse explained the entry steps near that lot line are within 7’ of the property line, but that access will be eliminated and the steps will be removed. There Is an existing well under the steps which he hopes to move. Mrs. Harren noted Mr. Evans was In agreement with their position. She noted they would like to sell a portion of their outlot to Thiesse so a variance would not be needed. Jabbour asked If she would be willing to do so if they no longer would have riparian access. Harren said they do not wish to give up their riparian rights. Thiesse stated, under the new shoreland regulations, he would stiI I need to have variance approval, and if any of the outlot was sold off, the owners could not retain riparian rights. He felt his request for a variance should not be contingent on the purchase of additional property. Jabbour felt they were Improving the situation by eliminating the access and entry stairs on the eastern side. Harren reiterated this issue has just come up and they would I Ike to have their land appraised and have time to consider selling a portion to Thiesse. Mabusth noted the additional land to be acquired by the applicant would only eliminate the need for a side setback variance. I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 ZONING FILE #1777 - CONT. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution #3214, #1777 John Thiesse, 3845 Bayside Road, approving variances for the construction of a complete second floor, entry addition and three-season porch. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#12 & 13) #1778 & #1779 ANDREW GOETTEN, 1385 FOX STREET - VARIANCE - PRELIMINARY PLAT Andrew Goetten was present. J. DIann discussion of this item. Goetten abstained from Callahan clarified that the Council did not desire to rezone the property in question. Gaffron reviewed this two lot subdivision, splitting a 3.6 acre parcel Into one 2 acre lot and one 1 acre lot. This would require a variance to both the subdivision and zoning codes. He referred to Resolution #1178 adopted by the Council In the 1980s during the Minnetonka Bluffs Sewer Project indicating standards for future approval of this proposed subdivision. He continued, the MUSA boundary was located to bisect the property. The City Engineer has recommended requiring additional right-of-way dedication, which Is standard practice with all subdivisions. Because the road dedications make it Impossible for the proposal to meet all zoning and subdivision requirements as noted by the 1980 resolution, staff must recommend denial. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Butler, to approve App'ications #1778 & #1779 for Andrew Goetten, 1385 Fox Street, for a variance and preliminary plat approval as proposed by the applicant, subject to deletion of the requirement for dedication of land for the cul-de-sac and the additional right-of-way. Butler Indicated the staff memo implies the resolution adopted in the 1980s has somehow been voided. She felt a resolution adopted by the City Council Is a binding contract and should be considered done in good faith. Jabbour noted the Goettens paid for the right to subdivide the property In the 1980s by doing more than their fair share to assist in the sewer project. He added the size of the new parcel Is not an issue if the street dedication is not required. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 ZONING FILES #1778 & #1779 - CONT. Mayor Peterson interpreted the adopted resolution to condition approval of a subdivision on the proposal meeting all current standards. She stated she was hard pressed to approve a lot area variance with a subdivision. She asked what makes this request different and/or the same as other subdivisions requested. Gaffron stated the Council would be making a compromise to the street standards if this Is approved without roadway dedications or upgrades, which makes it more difficult to enforce the standards in the future. Jabbour reiterated this is an unusual circumstance. He noted the former CouncI I determined the sewer project was more Important than the addlticnal right-of-way acquisition. Callahan referred to a similar case on Stubbs Bay Road whereby the City made concessions In the past to allow development, which has dictated future approvals. Mayor Peterson asked the ramifications if approved. Barrett felt approval might serve as a precedent. He added. City made a decision in the past which they felt necessary public safety, and now they are asked to pay the price. the for Callahan referred to a recent subdivision request on North Arm which the City recommended less dedication of right-of-way to facilitate the subdivision. Butler suggested approval per the applicant’s request, not requiring additional road dedication. Callahan accepted this suggestion as an amendment to his motion. Gaffron asked that Counci I approve the dedication of the additional right-of-way for Orono Orchard Road and Orono Lane, which does not bring the parcel under the minimum acreage. Butler suggested approving only conditions #2 through 7 and #9 in the staff memo. Callahan agreed. Callahan suggested the hardship for approval Is that the City agreed to the subdivision by a contract which the Council determines to be binding. Vote: Ayes 3, nays 1. Mayor Peterson voted nay. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 (««14, 15 & 16) DAVID CARLSON 600, 610 & 620 BIG ISLAND: #1785 - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION #3215 #1781/#1782 - VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #1783/#1784 - VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3215 for Application #1785, David Carlson, 600, 610 and 620 Big Island, granting preliminary approval of a plat of the properties; and Applications #1781, #1782, #1783 and #1784 for variances and conditional use permits. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#17) SHORELAND FLEXIBILITY UPDATE Gaffron reported the DNR has hired a person to do the review of the proposed shoreland regulations. The City has not received comments from them, but does not anticipate any surprises. Jabbour stated he would like to abstain from sending one City requesting flexibility the usual response from Orono. Callahan agreed and suggested sending the other four cities a letter acknowledging the City’s receipt of their flexibility request. Goetten concurred, but felt a sensitive letter expressiv.g the City’s position would be appropriate to the fifth City. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to direct Goetten to draft and send a letter to the City in question citing the City’s position and objections to the requested flexibility, and to direct staff to draft appropriate response letters to the remaining four cities acknowledging the City’s receipt of the flexibility requests. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#18) LAKESIDE MARINA - LICENSE ISSUES Jabbour abstained from discussion regarding this issue. Gaffron explained the issue in question is the screening for the east side of the property. He noted the landscape plan for the property pre-dates Dunn’s ownership of the property. Callahan thought Installation of that responsibility, and maintenarce of responsIbiIity. screening was same i s to the be City’s Dunn’s 8 I I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORCNO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 LAKESIDE MARINA - LICENSE ISSUES - CONT. Gaffron noted that neither staff nor aoplleant have been able to document exactly what screening may have once existed or been removed as a result of the sewer re-routing. He continued that given the possible changes in use of the adjacent property, forcing adherence to the old landscape plan may ultimately be a wasted effort and should no longer be a reason to withhold the license. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Butler, to approve the 1992 marina license for Lakeside Marina, subject to the conditions set forth in the “Exhibit". Ayes 5, nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT A) Jabbour reported, at the LMCD last Board meeting the members received the letter from Mayor Peterson. JoElien Hurr gave a speech on the City’s behalf. The Board expressed their unhappiness with Orono, and the Chair called for a secret ballet to reconfirm Grathwal’s position. The voio was 4 to 8 against Orono’s request for Grathwal’s resignation. Jabbour noted 50-60X of the lakeshore property represented voted for Orono’s proposal. He said Orono lost their proposal 2 to 1 based on the opposition having approximately 20* of the lakeshore represented. He felt that shows the major flaw in the LMCD’s enabling legislation. He stated democracy was not present at that meeting. He added, Orono feels the LMCD’s Task Force is flawed, and therefore he did not attend the recent meetings. He said, "under no circumstances should the City feel comfortable having the LMCD represent the City". B) Goetten thanked Mayor Peterson and Butler for their many years of service to the City. ENGINEER’S REQUEST (*#19) REQUEST #2 FINAL PAY REQUEST - MCCULLEY ROAD MSA PROJECT It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to authorize payment to Bituminous Consulting & Contracting for the McCulley Road MSA Project, in the amount of $4,245.46. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#20) CHANGE ORDER #2 - STUBBS BAY SEWER IMPROVEMENT It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve Change Order No. 2 that provides for additional items necessary to complete construction of the Stubbs Bay Sanitary Sewer Project. Ayes 5, nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 (#21) OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD BIKE/HIKE TRAIL - DICK FLINT Dick Flint and Lili McMillan were present to represent the Park Commission. Flint introduced Jim White, Shirley Bonine, and Del Mi I Ier from Hennepin Parks. He reported the County originally felt the total trail cost should not exceed $200,000, and anything beyond that amount was due to street improvements which should be the City’s responsibility. He not'd he was able to convince Hennepin Parks that if the trail were to be located further west, they would have difficulty crossing Highway 12 and the railroad tracks. Flint said the additional cost Is due to the need to upgrade the existing rural sections of road to a urban section to allow the bike trail to be within the right-of-way, thereby eliminating the need to acquire further easements. He noted they have reached a compromise whereby Orono and Hennepin Parks would split the entire cost of the project, less the amount for tree planting (which Hennepin Parks will pay), less the trail extension through Baker Park, and less the easement acquisition amount. Therefore, the amount Hennepin Parks will be responsible for will be $300,000, and Orono will be responsible for $280,000. A provision has been included whereby if the entire cost of the project exceeds the estimated amount, either party has the right to cancel and design costs will be split between the two parties. Jabbour stated he was opposed to the trail running on private land as easement acquisition is cost prohibitive. Flint noted the $30,000 for land acquisition is hoped to come from future Park Dedication Funds, and the Park Commission is proposing tha use of $16,000 of Park Dedication Funds to reduce the City’s portion to an amount equal to one year’s portion of MSA funds. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Butler, to agree to enter into a contract with Hennepin Parks, with the City Attorney assisting in development of said contract, noting the City’s portion Is not to exceed $268,000 and the City will not determine the source of funding at this time. Doug Hile, 2790 Silverview Drive, felt the dollar amount for land acquisition should be significantly higher. He noted the loss of trees on his property due to the trail. Cook stated the traiI wlI I actually run on the right-of-way portion by Hile’s property, but the storm sewer installation will necessitate the removal of trees. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 BIKE/HIKE TRAIL - CONT. Flint stated Hennepin Parks Is willing to replace those trees with screen Ing. Callahan felt the City should hold another public meeting to allow affected property owners to express their concerns. Flint noted there Is nothing m the conti/.ct providing the City with a right to withdraw unless the project cost Is over-run. Butler suggested the City not make a decision until they know the total easement acquisition cost. Flint felt the temporary easements needed would not be costly. White added, the contract was estabiIshed for the financial benefit of both parties, however, If for some unforeseeable reason the project could not be realized, the County * ' 'd be willing to cancel the project and not hold the City responsible for following through. Terl Brandenburg stated she has not been kept abreast of the development. She noted In the past she felt Intimidated by comments made by FIInt and Ml Iler. She added, they were told the tralI would be marked to give the abutting property owners some Idea how they will be affected, but to date that has not happened. Jabbour noted detailed plans have not been completed. He asked the staff to contact all affected property owners and Inform them of the progress. Brandenburg expressed concern about the safety aspect of crossing Highway 12, even at the light. Mayor Peterson noted that is one concern they have already cons Idered. Butler indicated if the trail is in place prior to Highway 12 being upgraded, the Highway Department would be responsible for the improvements needed to the tralI. Miller stated that he only intended to state factual replies and did not Intend to Intimidate anyore. Vote: Ayes 5, nays 0. Jabbour thanked Jim White and Shirley Bonine for their years of service. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 (»»22) AUTHORIZATION TO DISBURSE CITY FUNDS FOR CLAIMS RECEIVED It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to authorize the City Treasurer to disburse City funds in payment of claims received for the December 28th Council meeting, which has been cancelled and that such paid claims are to be presented at the January 11, 1993 regular Council meeting for formal approval. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#23) 1992 INTERFUND TRANSFERS & LOAN PAYMENTS Callahan asked wny some fund transfers are referred to as budgeted and some are not. Kuehn explained the only one that would not have been budgeted tor is the street lighting, which is an unknown figure. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to approve the Interfund operating transfers, loan payments and special assessment payments on City property as presented, effective December 31, 1992. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#24) APPOINT INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD FOR 1993 Callahan asked the necessity of such a position and his responsIbI Iity to the City. Moorse explained the City contracts with an insurance agent of record to supply expertise with regard to Insurance and fees. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Mayer Peterson, to appoint Mr. Duweyn Carlson. Apple Valley Agency, as Insurance Agent of Record for 1993, at a fee not to exceed $7,250, including commissions earned on policy premiums paid by the City, and to direct City staff to review the situation and seek competitive bids. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#25) EXCESS LIABILITY INSURANCE - RESOLUTION #3216 Cal Iahan asked that this issue be clarified, if the City elects not to waive the Statutory limits, the excess coverage would only be available only for those claims that are not covered. If the City elects to waive le Statutory limits, the excess coverage would be >>vallable for all claims. The City has elected to waive the limits f«^cause of expo*-, ire to some kinds of liabilities which the /.Tdtutory limits »*"-her don’t or might not apply. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 EXCESS LIABILITY INSURANCE - CONT. Barrett explained in the general terms, the City has sovereign immunity, which has been waived by the State up to a certain limit, so that the City can be sued for damages up to that amount. If the City elects to be insured above that amount, then the City would be waiving the liability so it may actually pay more than the amount. He opined, the contract appears to indicate the only way to get coverage is to waive those limits. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Butler, to adopt Resolution #3216 waiving the monetary limits on Tort Liability established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04, and directed staff to further explain this issue at the next meeting. Ayes 5, nays 0. (»#26) APPOINTMENT OF AUDITOR FOR FISCAL YEAR 1992 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to appoint the audit firm of Malloy, Karnowski, Radosevich 4 Co. to perform the required audits for the 1992 fiscal year at an estimated cost of $15,400 plus direct expenses and to assist with the Certificate of Achievement Financial Reporting Program at a cost not to exceed $3,000. Ayes 5, nays 0. (»#27) 1993 APPLICATION FOR COVERAGE UNDER THE LMCIT SELF-INSURANCE WORKERS' COMPENSATION PLAN It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve the 1993 AppIication for Coverage under the LMCIT Self-Insured Workers Compensation Plan and award the 1993 worker compensation insurance to the LMCIT for the initial net premium of $46,178, effective January 1, 1993. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#28) 1993 COMPENSATION ADJUSTMENT - RESOLUTION #3217 Callahan suggested it was time to revisit the step increases incorporated within the compensation plan. Moorse stated this information is meant to satisfy questions asked at the last meeting. He noted Council should approve the wage percentage increase, but the eligible step increases are only provided for information at this time. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to adopt Resolution #3217 establishing salaries for City employees and a mileage increase effective January 1, 1993. Ayes 5, nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 (429) EXTENSION OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT OF THE WEST HENNEPIN RECYCLING COMMISSION - RESOLUTION #3218 It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution #3218 to extend the term of Joint Powers Agreement of West Hennepin Recycling Commission. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#30) LEE A JULIE HARREN EXEMPTION FROM STUBBS BAY SEWER PROJECT - RESOLUTION #3219 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3219 exempting the property at 175 Landmark Drive from inclusion In the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#31) 1992 & 1993 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve the budget amendments t the 1992 and 1993 budgets to reflect expenditures as presented. :: 5, nays 0. («#32) SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEFERMENTS - STUBBS BAY SEWER PROJECT - RESOLUTIONS #3220 & #3221 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #322\j ;:-*'roving a special assessment deferment for Rose Madden; and adopt s?j»solution #3221 approving a special assessment deferment for Hazel snderson. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#33) APPOINTMENT TO THE LONG LAKE FIRE DEPARTMENT ADVISORY BOARD Jabbour felt it would be an undue hardship to appoint the Police Chief to this position as he has to work closely with both cities. He felt this appointment should be one of the new Council members. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to table consideration of the appointment to the Long Lake Fire Department Advisory Board until January 11th. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#34) JANITORIAL SERVICES NEW FACILITY "REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS" It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to authorize contracting with Town & Country Services for Janitorial services for the new faciIIty for $905.00 per month. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#35) VOLUNTEER COMMISSION VACANCIES Mayor Peterson asked that persons whose terms are about to expire be asked if they wish to continue to serve on the Commission. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL . EETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 VOLUNTEER COMMISSION VACANCIES - CONT. Gerhardson clarified that the Ordinance requires a 8 person Park Commission, but it is strongly recommended to amend that Ordinance to require only 7 people. It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Jabbour, to authorize the City to advertise for vacancies on both the Park Commission and the Planning Commission,-and to direct staff to draft an amendment to the Ordinance to require only a 7 member Park Commission. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#36) PLANS FOR THE MOVE TO THE NEW CITY FACILITIES It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to accept the memo regarding this item. Ayes 5, nays 0. (»#37) PUBLIC WORKS VEHICLE SERVICE EQUIPMENT APPLICATION & CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT #1 & #2 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve Architect’s Application and Certificate for Payment #1 and #2 for vehicle service equipment, in the total amount of $23,367.17 to Zahi Equipment Company. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#38) JOB EVALUATION STUDY UPDATE Callahan asked If staff is suggesting hiring someone to do this job. Moorse explained in 1986 the City Joined with about 150 other cities and contracted with Personnel Decision, Inc. To update the City’s policy would merely Involve submitting updated information to that company. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Butler, to authorize the re- evaluation of the department head positions and staff personnel. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#39) AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH POLICE EXPLORER POST Sullivan explained this program provides positive contact with the youth of the area and surrounding communities, and gives them an opportunity to become involved in their community. This program also allows the officers to buiId a better rapport with the youth. All Council members agreed this Is a good and necessary program Lsto... __ _ _ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 (#40) CITY HALL & PUBLIC WORKS BUILDINGS APPLICATION & CERTIFICATE OF PAYMENT #10 Jabbour asked where the ledger is that would provide the Council with information on the amounts spent to date and amounts remaining. He said he is unsure of where the requested payments fit into the overall project. Callahan said Council needs to know how much is left of the bonds, and they do not seem to be able to get the answers they need. Jabbour noted he is afraid change orders may have been approved without Council approval. He noted it is imperative to retain 10% for any corrections needed. Callahan referred to the items in dispute. Moorse noted tho*>e items have not been paid and are not on the request to be paid. Callahan stated he Is reluctant to authorize payment as they do not know the position of each expenditure. Butler stated It was a waste of time to pay the bill then review the situation. It was moved by Jabbour, to authorize staff to disburse payment as requested, providing the Administrator and Finance Director has ensured to the best of their ability that the amount does not exceed the contract amount, it is only payment for work done, and the 10% retainer is held. There was no second to the motion. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to establish a meeting for January 4, 1993 at 4:00 to swear in the newly elected Council members and to hold a special meeting to consider payment as requested, and that the Counci I receive the necessary material prior to that meeting for review. Ayes 5, nays 0. Jabbour withdrew his original motion. (#41) CITY FACILITIES CHANGE ORDERS It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to defer consideration of payment until the January 4, 1993 meeting. Ayes 5, nays 0. ! MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 (#42) CRYSTAL BAY POST OFFICE LEASE It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve the information submitted regarding this issue. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#43) CHANGE IN COUNCIL MEETING START TIME It was moved by Caliahan, seconded by Jabbour, to authorize the starting time of Council meetings to 7:30 p.m. beginning January 1, 1993. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#44) CITY OF ORONO, 1000 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION Butler clarified that both proposed .lots do not meet the required 2 acre standard. Mabusth confirmed that they do not, in part because of the wetland to the southwest and the required 50’ road outlet. Callahan suggested removal of this matter from the consideration of the public to avoid a conflict with the public hearing reauirements, and the Council review the issues involved with the property in closed session. (#44A) PHONE SYSTEM MOVE & EXPANSION It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to authorize Integrated Communications Inc. to move the current phone system to the new facilities, and the purchase of the additional equipment as needed, for an amount not to exceed $7,380.00. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#45) LICENSES It was moved by Jabbour, following Iicenses: seconded by Goetten, to approve the Residential Kennel Licenses: Steve Esco, 320 Big Island Wayne & Gayle Carrier, 1376 North Arm Drive Suzanne Fackler, 3700 Togo Road Judith Spinner, 940 North Arm Drive Thomas & Ingrid Anderson, 3550 North Shore Drive Commercial Kennel License: The Dog House Boarding Kennels, Inc., 3507 Wayzata Boulevard On-Sale Liquor: Jimmies Lounge, 3380 Shoreline Drive MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 14, 1992 LICENSES - CONT. Off-Sale Liquor: Navarre Liquors, 3421 Shoreline Drive Club Liquor: Wayzata Country Club, 200 Wayzata Boulevard WoodhiI I Country Club, 200 WoodhiI I Road Off-Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor: O’Sullivans, 3420 Shadywood Road On-Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor: Orono Golf Course, 265 Orono Orchard Road South On & Off Sale Non-Intoxicating Liquor: Navarru Lanes, 3435 Shoreline Drive Ayes 5, nays 0. (««46) BILLS It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve payment of the AM Funds Account. Ayes 5, nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Peterson adjourned the regular Orono City Council meeting at 10:40 p.m. to Executive Session. Ayes 5, nays 0. 0 AT'JjBST: 'boT^thy M^^a I I i n, cTty Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Edward J. Callahan. Jr., May^ / \ ! */- 'i; I-k i.;. ‘i •(i’- ;v' )■ ■ f I'I I f: k I- ?lar.r.ir.c Camnissicr. PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE /c^?bZ. PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) 3a4 ‘5' Sa a lyoekh // dcuf a 6c'f e-Xc fo 3^ fi S/ # V / y 4. 5. 6 • 7. 8. 9. ,0. ,1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. • 0. n ■ i f m k AGENDA FOR COUNCIL NBBTING SET FOR MONDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1992, 7:00 P.H. •*** meeting to be HELD IN NEW CITY FACILITIES COUNCIL CHAMBERS **** 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY (*)Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held upon reguest. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be|^tained upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL 1. CONSENT AGENDA* APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 2. Regular Meeting of November 23, 1992 * 3. Truth in Taxation Meeting of December 1, 1992 * 4. Special Meeting of December 1, 1992 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Stephen Peterson Representative LONG LAKE FIRE DEPARTMENT REPORT PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Liait 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT ••APPLICANTS** laaediately after the Council has reeiewea your application please sign the three (3) original resolutions at the Recorder's desk. Applicants need not execute resolutions for subdivisions, vacations and denials. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. Ordinance Revision — Business and Joint Use of Lake Facilities - Section 5.42 (revised). Section 5.43 (add) #1706 William & Evelyn Knapp, 4300 Bayside Road - Final Subdivision/PRD - Resolution #1749 Jim Lawrence, 1550 Sixth Avenue North - Final Subdivision - Resolution #1762 Paul Boyke - Preliminary Plat Approval - Resolution #1768/#1 ‘^86 Dr. William R. and Rhoda T. Omlie, 1860 Shadywood Road - Conditional Use Permit/Variances #1775 Robert D. Luesse, 3249 Casco Circle - Variances - Resolution #1777 John Thiesse, 3845 Bayside Road - Variances - Resolution #1778 Andrew Goetten, 1385 Fox Street - Variance #1779 Andrew Goetten, 1385 Fox Street - Preliminary Plat #1785 David Carlson, 600, 161 and 620 Big Island - Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution #1781/#1782 David Carlson, 620 Big Island - Variance/Conditional Use Permit #1783/#1784 David Carlson, 610 Big Variance/Conditional Use Permit Shcreland Flexibility Update Lakeside Marina - License Issues Island f. nuc.ML>n LXJIX m;.c.iXiMo &CT tOK liUNUAV^ UKCfeSMBKK 14, 19*12, P.M. **** meeting to be held in new city facilities cooncil chahbems **** 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY HAYOR/COONCIL REPORT ENGINEER REPORT 19. Request #2 Final Pay Request - McCulley Road MSA Project 20. Change Order #2 - Stubbs Bay Sewer Improvement * 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. * * 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 21. Old Cyrstal Bay Road Bike/Hike Trail - Dick Flint Authorization to Disburse City Funds for Claims Received 1992 Interfund Transfers and Loan Payments Appoint Insurance Agent of Record for 1993 Excess Liability Insurance - Resolution Appointment of Auditor for Fiscal year 1992 1993 Application for Coverage Under the LMCIT Self-Insurance Workers' Compensation Plan 1993 Compensation Adjustment - Resolution Extension of Joint Powers Agreement of the West Hennepin Recycling Commission - Resolution Lee and Julie Harren Exemption From Stubbs Bay Sewer Project - Resolution 1992 and 1993 Budget Adjustments Special Assessment Deferments - Stubbs Bay Sewer Project - Resolutions Appointment to the Long Lake Fire Department Advisory Board Janitorial Services New Facility "Request for Proposals" Volunteer Commission Vacancies Plans for the Move to the New City Facilities Public Works Vehicle Service Equipment Application and Certificate for Payment No. 1 and No. 2 Job Evaluation Study Update Authorization to Establish Police Explorer Post City Hall 6 Public Works Buildings Application and Certificate of Payment No. 10 City Facilities Change Orders Crystal Bay Post Office Lease Change in Council Meeting Start Time City of Orono, 1000 Old Crystal Bay Road - Preliminary Subdivision 44A. Phone System Move and Expansion * * 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT LICENSES (45*) BILLS (46*) ADJOURNMENT INFORMATION ITEMS INCLUDED IN COUNCIL PACKET DPCOMING ISSPES AND EVENTS i2/14 - 6:j0^.M. Ribbon cutting Ceremony for City Council Chambers 12/14 - Council Meeting 7 p.m. 12/24 - Holiday 12/25 - Holiday - Christmas 12/28 - Administrative Office Moving Day 01/01 - Holiday - New Year's Day 01/06 - Park Commission Meeting 7 p.m. 01/11 - Council Meeting 7 p.m. 01/18 - Holiday - Martin Luther King 01/19 - Tuesday Planning Commission 7 p.m. 01/25 - Council Meeting 7 p.m. A A / % MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEEflNG. ^ ^ c HELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992 % ROLL ) The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Peterson, CouncIImembers J. DIann Goetten, Gabriel Jabbour, Edward Callahan and Mary Butler. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Ron Moorse, Public Works Director John Gerhardson, Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, Pol ice Chief Stephen Sul I Ivan, City Attorney Thomas Barrett, City Engineer Glenn Cook and City Recorder Teri Naab. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. (t1) CONSENT AGENDA Butler added Items #9, 10, 13, 15 and 19. Callahan reported the ONR has extended the deadline date for cities to adopt new shoreiand regulations. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Ayes 5, nays 0. Motions for all Items adopted by consent agenda will be included in the minutes in their respective numerical order. («»2) APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Council held on November 9, 1992. Ayes 5, nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS Moorse reported there will be a meeting tomorrow with Hennepin Parks to further negotiate the budget for the bike/hike trail. Jabbour stated he had talked today with Jim White who feels that they should proceed with the trail as it will be much more difficult to construct in the future. LMCD COMMENTS JoEllen Hurr reported the next Board meeting will be held December 2nd, and to date, there is not an agenda. She said she would report on lake access issues after the meeting to be held on December 9th. Callahan asked meeting. if she attended the last Planning Commission 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992 LMCD COMMENTS - CONT. Hurr said she did not, but added she had talked to Linnell of the ONR who indicated the DNR is not sure where they are going after that meeting. Callahan stated he was more interested in guiding the LMCD's path from the point of that meeting onward. Jabbour said the meeting of the LMCD subcommittee held tonight was to determine where the Task Force fits Into the process. He felt that body will not ever be able to function. He added at least 7 or S members of the LMCD have absolutely no interest in that Issue and have no knowledge of the issue. Hurr felt an issue of concern is that member cities are expecting credibility from their representatives. She noted some of the cities don’t even want the representatives to attend the meetings. Goetten felt that the LMCD representatives should be elected to provide for more accountabiiity. Callahan felt there were very serious problems with that idea. He stated cities should give consideration of the problem in the coming year. LONG LAKE FIRE DEPARTMENT REPORT There was no report. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (•3) eiTSA AUSTIN EVANS, 255 LANDMARK DRIVE > PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION 93201 Austin Evans was present. i : I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992 ZONING FILE t1764 - CONT. Gaffron explained this is a 2 lot subdivision of a parcel to the west of Landmark Drive. The property contains approximately 6 acres. The lot to be split off meets the 2 acre requirement. Planning Commission agreed that the parcel contains adequate dry buildable land within this sewered zone. One issue to be resolved, is the right of riparian access from the outlot platted with the original subdivision of the area. The Planning Commission agreed with staff that only one lot should have riparian access. It is recommended by staff that Lot 1 be assessed the entire amount of the assessment for Bayside North, and that Lot 2 be required to pay for a connection charge at the Stubbs Bay Northwest rate when a building permit is issued. Access to the newly created lot will be directly across from the Thiesse property and a permit from the County will be required. Evans stated he would like Lot 1 to retain riparian access. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Jabbour, to adopt Resolution S3201 for Application #1764 for Austin Evans, 255 Landmark Drive, for preliminary subdivision approval, with the condition that only Lot 1 have riparian access. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#4) #1767 GEORGE A THERESA BLOOM, 1374 REST POINT ROAD - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3202 George Bloom was present. Mabusth explained the applicants propose the installation of a 22x26’ detached garage requiring a street setback variance of 3’. The majority of the garage will meet the 35’ setback. An earlier application included a two story structure with a skyway that connected to the principal structure. She noted at the time of that review, the water surface of a pool was not considered hardcover. The current proposal results in a .5X hardcover increase. The applicants propose extensive removals of existing hardcover. The Blooms did not calculate the landscape areas underlain with plastic in their hardcover review, but have agreed to remove those areas. Also, the benches in the 0-75’ zone will be moved to the patio area, the walk will be removed, and the patio steps will be reduced. Bloom added, they may decide to add a basement under the garage whicn will eliminate the retaining walIs around the garage and thus reduce the hardcover percentage. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992 ZONING file #1767 - CONT. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Butler, to adopt Resolution #3202 for AppIication #1767 for George and Theresa Bloom, 1374 Rest Point Road, approving variances to construct a detached garage. Ayes 5, nays 0. Callahan said the proper administrative procedure would have permitted the Planning Commission to act on the information available before it came to the Council for review. (#5) #1773 ROBERT KOEHNEN, 537 HANLON AVENUE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3203 Robert Koehnen was present. Mabusth explained this application is to allow the rebuilding of an existing detached garage that does not meet the required side or rear setbacks. The applicant has replaced the retaining walls at the rear of the property with a boulder wall, approximately 7- 8’ in height. The City Engineer suggests that the City not address the boulder wall with regard to it structurally supporting the bank. The applicant has provided the City with a letter from the neighbor to the north approving the wail as it was installed. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution #3203 for Application #1773 for Robert Koehnen, 537 Hanlon Avenue, approving variances for the reconstruction of the detached garage and land alterations. Ayes 6, nays 0. (#6) #1493 & #1570 CHUCK DOWNEY, 3665 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CLARIFICATION OF COUNCIL DIRECTION Chuck Downey was present. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992 ZONING FILES #1493 & 1570 - CONT. Mabusth explained, per a recent letter from Mr. Downey that he Is not proceeding with the structural improvements. In 1982 the City granted approval of setback variances for the Installation of a detached garage and hardcover in the 75-250’ setback area was approved at 45X. In the current hardcover Inventory, hardcover was shown at 59% due to a change in policy regarding the calculation of hardcover. During the 1982 review it was suggested that the applicant provide a back-out apron. During the most current review, the City Engineer advised that the apron could not function properly because of the location of Casco Point Road. The appileant has obtained a permit for the deck. The applicant questions the need to now remove the hardcover scheduled for removal per the approval resolution. Butler clarified that the hardcover removals wore scheduled to off­ set the additional construction, which has not happened. She felt If the construction does not occur, the hardcover scheduled for removal can remain. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to direct staff with regard to Apolications #1493 and #1570 for Chuck Downey of 2665 Casco Poini road to not require the hardcover removals on the property pro *ded a building permit is not issued for additional construction. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#7) LICENSE DENIAL - GAYLES MARINA - RESOLUTION #3204 Jabbour abstained from discussion of this Item. Gaffron stated the City Attorney has suggested changes to the draft resolution deleting reference to the number of slips allowed, as the code does not directly address this issue and it should not be a reason for denial of a license. Butl^ir asked If a judge would laugh at the City because of the lack of past enforcemont of the licensing requirement. Barrett felt the City has decided to now proceed formally with the license requirement. He noted the resolution does not suggest denial of the license due to past history of the property. Callahan suggested deletion of the paragraph beginning with "further be it resolved". Barrett felt that would be appropriate and did not feel It necessary to wait until December 31st to take action. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992 LICENSE DENIAL - GAYLES MARINA - CONT. Gaffron noted that the owner of the marina has been advised of this action and has made no attempt to contact the City. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution #3204, denying the application of Gayle’s Marina for a 1992 Commercial Marina License, with the paragraph beginning with "further be It resolved" deleted from that resolution. Ayes 4, nays 0. Jabbour abstained. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to direct staff to commence enforcement of non-compliance procedures. Gaffron explained the only enforcement clause of the code requires this to be handled as a misdemeanor and be issued a tag for the violation of operating without a license. He stated there is not a code section requiring the operation to cease because of the lack of a I I cense. Callahan felt only one ticket should be issued to the owner and added the property contains violations of the zoning code, which may provide other methods of enforcement. He felt the City should not consider litigation at this point. He stated the City will be considering new marina licensing regulations in the near future which will provide a more effective means for enforcing such non­ comp 11ance issues. Vote: Ayes 4, nays 0. Jabbour abstained. («8) INITIAL JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE - PHEASANT LAWN HOMEOWNERS* ASSOCIATION - RESOLUTION #3205 Mr. Forrer was present to represent the Association. Gaffron explained this is a request, perhaps 20> years late, to allow a multiple dock system within the Pheasant Lawn subdivision. He stated the area was dredged in the late 1940s to create access via a channel to the lake. Five of the slips are associated with the multiple dock and a sixth dock is associated with an adjacent property owner. The homeowners’ association was formed in 1979, many years after the docks were installed. There have not been any complaints. The code requires a joint dock license to be Issued for the installation of such, but under the current code, if the s''stem were proposed as new, could not be allowed due to requireme. c of minimum width of lots for each slip. Lot 14 functions as an outlot. Jabbour felt they should be careful not to set a precedent, and noted the need to treat people equitably. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992 PHEASANT LAWN HOMEOWNERS* ASSOCIATION - CONT. Callahan noted historically, there was considerable Innovative character in dredging and the dredging was done solely to create riparian use. He stated this was done with approval from the City. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to adopt Resolution #3205 directing staff to Issue a Joint Use Dock License to Pheasant Lawn Homeowners’ Association subject to conditions noted therein for the period of November 23, 1992 to December 31, 1993. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*•9) SHORELAND FLEXIBILITY REQUESTS It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to accept the information on the shore I and flexibility requests as presented.. Ayes 5. nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT A) Callahan noted that Shorewood, along with other cities, has met with differences with the MWCC activities. He asked the status of the City of Orono. Moorse explained, Orono along with most lake cities, has experienced similar problems with regard to the rate increase by the MWCC due to a higher water table and infiltration and inflow. He added, the MWCC is two years behind from projection of cost to pay request, thus part of the problem. The City Engineer is reviewing the status to make sure Orono is within the realm of reasonability regarding the charges. Callahan asked if the additional charge is in part due to leakage into the pipes. Moorse stated that was part of it, and also run-off Into manholes contrIbutes. Jabbour suggested implementing an inspection of sump pumps to ensure they are not being pumped into the system. Moorse stated that has been d.scussed. Jabbour felt that should be implemented as soon as possible. .AR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING :MBER 23. 1992:^IATION - CONT.there was considerable innovative dredging was done solely to create s done with approval from the City.ded by Jabbour, to adopt Resolution i Joint Use Dock License to Pheasant Libject to conditions noted therein 1992 to December 31, 1993. Ayes 5, lUESTS d by Mayor Peterson, to accept the axibility requests as presented. 1, along with other cities, has met activities. He asked the status of ig with most lake cities, has th regard to the rate increase by table and infiltration and Inflow, behind from projection of cost to e problem. The City Engineer is ure Orono is within the realm of rges. I charge is in part due to leakage it, and also run-off Into manholes an Inspection of i into the system. ;ussed. sump pumps to emented as soon as possible. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETINGHELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - CONT. B) Goetten reported, as a member of the League of Minnesota Cities Planning Committee, the conference for the coming year will be held in St. Cloud. She noted she has volunteered Moorse and Sullivan to speak at a seminar on contracting services, and she will be working on a seminar regarding conflict within a City Council. Callahan noted items included in the packet from the League concerning State Aid, and suggested that be given attention. Moorse reported the direction of the Governor indicates State Aid to cities will be a low priority in order to balance the budget. He suggested meeting with the City’s Legislators to discuss this issue. ENGINEER’S REPORT (*•10) PAY REQUEST «4 - STUBBS BAY SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to authorize payment to Progressive Contractors, Inc. for the Stubbs Bay Sanitary Sewer Improvements in the amount of $275,415.46 Ayes 5, nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (*#11) CERTIFICATION OF DELINQUENT SEPTIC INSPECTION FEES, SEWER a WATER UTILITY ACCOUNTS ft RECYCLING PROGRAM FEE - RESOLUTION #3206 li *^as moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution »C206 providing for the collection of delinquent 1992 sewer and watir utility service charges, recycling program fees and annual servica charges for the on-site sewage treatment (septic) Inspection program. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#12) CERTIFICATION OF UNPAID DEVELOPER’S FEES $ ALARM USER FEES - RESOLUTION #3207 It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution #3207 providing for the collection of delinquent 1992 developer fees and alarm user fees. Ayes 5, nays 0. 8 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992 (««13) 1993 WAGE & INSURANCE ADJUSTMENTS I^ was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve the ftt:iifT"rAg:ammef»daXioo__as outlined In the memo dated 11/19/92. The combined effect of the wage and Insurance Increase Is to Increase total wage and Insurance expenditures of 3.2X. Ayes 5, nays 0. <*t14) CALENDAR OF OFFICIAL MEETINGS & HOLIDAYS FOR 1993 It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve the 1993 calendar of official meetings and holidays. Ayes 5, nays 0. («»15) AMENDMENTS TO FEE SCHEDULE ORDINANCE *111, SECOND SERIES It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve the amendments to the 1993 fee schedule Ordinance #111, Second Series. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#16) DESIGNATED USE OF CRYSTAL BAY SITE Moorse stated the general consensus by the Council with regard to the use of the Crystal Bay site has been to leave the area as open space/park land and start some process with the Park Commission and neighbors to determine future use. He suggested the Council take formal action to give staff direction on this Issue. Butler felt the resolve of the use of this site Is based on the need to balance the budget for the new facilities. Callahan stated Council passed a resolution not long ago directing staff to prepare a budget and prepare to remove the existing buildings and turn the land Into greensward. The budget for the new facilities had an off-setting revenue source from both the Crystal Bay site and the Sewer pond site. He felt the economic situation may not warrant the sale of either parcel at present. He felt they should proceed as former Council action directed. He said to make further commitment, Council needs to see the final budget for the new faciIitIes. Moorse indicated that within the budget for the new facilities, $35,000 of revenue from the sale of the Crystal Bay site has been listed, with an off-setting amount of $c5,0C0 to raze the existing buildings. He noted the State Petro fund will pay a major portion of the tank removal, and the City’s Insurance with the League of Cities will pay the remainder o^ the cost. Cali ahan noted It Is felt by some that the subdivision of the sewer pond site will be quite costly, and therefore has not been pursued. I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992 DESIGNATED USE OF THE CRYSTAL BAY SITE - CONT. Jabbour stated the holding cost of these parcels will be coming out of the revenues dedicated toward the general fund out of the $2,000,000 set aside. (»17) FUEL STORAGE SYSTEM CITY FACILITIES Moorse reviewed at the last meeting. Council directed staff to investigate the above ground, two tank system. He reported the tanks meet all fire protection and environmental requirements and there is no indication those regulations will change in the near future. FUEL STORAGE SYSTEM > CONT. Jabbour asked why two tanks are proposed versus one, which would be cheaper. Moorse indicated the one tank system would not be significantly cheaper and the dimensions would change. He felt the larger one would be more noticeable. Jabbour asked how insignificant the cost difference would be. Moorse stated he was unsure of the exact amount. Butler asked the difference in size of tanks. Moorse stated the tanks proposed are square tanks and not considered huge. Goetten stated she would like to know the dimensions, cost benefits and see pictures of the proposal before making a decision. Jabbour stated it is totally unacceptable for a sworn official to take a position on an issue without adequate information. Mayor Peterson asked that the information be provided to Council prior to the upcoming holiday. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to delay action unti I the adjourned meeting to be held immediately fol lowing the Truth and Taxation meeting on December 1st. Ayes 5, nays 0. 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992 (#18) ARCHITECT FEES Moorse stated this is an update on the billings received from the architect. He noted a considerable amount included for relmburseables, which he has asked the architect to document. He said the architect fees and relmburseables will exceed the allocated amount within the budget. The budget represents an amount of $3,000 for relmburseables. Callahan suggested that all payments to the architect be withheld until the buildings are constructed and accepted by the City. He noted there is still a question whether the architect is responsible for excess amounts incurred by the City. Callahan and Jabbour noted they would not be attending the meeting on the morning December 1st with the architect, and directed staff to Inform the architect of the Council’s decision. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to direct staff not to make further payment to the architect until the building is completed and accepted by the City, and until the City has determined whether or not and to what extent charges should be made back to the architect for errors. Ayes 5, nays 0. Moorse noted a concern with regard to this action as to what extent the architect’s contract requires payment. He stated the City Is holding payment from August, and this may not be In keeping with the contract. Jabbour noted that the architect failed delivery of part of the contract, which caused the City delays and additional dollars. Callahan clarified that the difference between the amount paid to the architect and the budgeted amount is $21,000. He asked what has been held for 90 days. Moorse stated he Is holding invoices totaling approximately $24,000. He added, the architects total bill will be close to the budgeted amount of $242,000, but the relmburseables will be much hIgher. Callahan stated no one on the Council has approved payment of the reimburseabIes. Jabbour noted that the budgeted reimbursable amount was to include payment of the newsletter. He suggested Moorse review this item wlth the architect. I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992 ARCHITECT FEES - CONT. Moorse explained that the reimbursable amounts have been included with the architectural fees. Jabbour indicated at every meeting with the architect, he told the architect to keep an eye on the reimburseabIes and was told they were right on target. Vote: Ayes 5, nays 0. (»19) PROGRESS REPORT - FALL CLEAN-UP It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to accept the Information submitted on the fall clean-up. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#20) SELECTION OF A NAME FOR THE NEW CITY FACILITIES It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to approve a monument sign reading “Orono Municipal Facilities" and smaller directional signs for the new facilities sine. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*S21) SALARY ADJUSTMENT - OFFICER MARK TOMCZYK It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to increase Officer Mark Tomczyk’s salary from $18,724 per hour to $19,080 per hour as of November 17, 1992, as per the 1992 LELS contract currently In effect. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*•22) LICENSES There were no licenses. (*•23) BILLS It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, payment of the All Funds Account. Ayes 5, nays 0. to approve MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992 ADJOURNHb MI Mayor Petarson adjourned the regular Orono City Council meeting at 8:42 p.m. to Executive Session. Ayes 5, nays 0. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hal I In, City Clerk ^ I •I MINUTES OF THE 1993 BUDGET HEARING CITY OF ORONO C//y HELD DECEMBER 1, 1992 ROLL The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Peterson, CouncIImembers Gabriel Jabbour, Edward Callahan and Mary Butler. J. Oiann Goetten was absent. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Ron Moorse, Pubi ic Works Di rector John Gerhardson, Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Finance Director Torn Kuehn, and City Recorder Teri Naab. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 - 8:03 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication was noted. Newell Weed presented the Council with information concerning distribution of tax liability and State Aid. He stated Minnesota’s tax laws are based on the theory >*:hat all taxes paid are based on the ability to pay. Due to great inflation in the past years, the values of land in the suburban cities has escalated but incomes ha/e not to that degree. The tax system a iso ends up assessing more tax liability to people with less ability to pay. He reviewed slides on the Voss theory, which compares social security numbers to reported income and taxes paid. He stated In 1993 the Homesavers Circuit Breaker will be trying to cap property tax liability and create a more fair distribution of State Aid. Jabbour asked if commercial property is taxed in the same manner. Weed stated commercial, rental and non-homestead property is taxed in a different manner than residential. He noted the elderly, disabled and lower income families are those in greatest need of tax re Iief. Mayor Peterson thanked Mr. Weed for his presentation. Moorse explained the Truth and Taxation meeting along with the adoption of the City Budget is the final step In the process. He stated this meeting is a way for property owners to get Information on the Impact of the tax assessed to tneir property. He explained Orono started the budget process last April or May when the Department Heads submitted budget information from which the Administrator and Finance Director comp’led a budget overview for the Council to review. The Council then gave direction to staff on changes. The Council adopted a proposed budget, which has been distributed for review by property owners during this meeting. He reported City staff has tried to reflect the economic situation and the problems the City may encounter with regard to the State-level 1 J> MINUTES OF THE 1993 BUDGET HEARING CITY OF ORONO HELD DECEMBER 1, 1992 budget. He said they have tried to keep the budget as fiscally responsible as possible. Moorse explained the proposed budget includes a 3.2% overall increase of the General Fund, which includes a contingency amount of $50,000 for anticipated costs related to the Highway 12 corridor study and the potential cut in State Aid. He said the revenue loss experienced by Orono is in part dje to the economic conditions and the uncertainty of the Highway 12 situation. He reviewed slides showing the impact of the proposed increase and added because of the loss of the three tiered taxing system, the burden of the tax increase has been shifted to the homes taxed within the first tier. The increase in the budget represents a 9.6% increase in the City’s tax for the first tier properties, and a decrease for the remainder of properties. Barb Lohmann, 1860 Lakeview Terrace, stated the City’s portion of her tax bill has increased 17%, not the 9.6% increase as proposed. Kuehn explained the additional increase is due to the increase in the valuation of the property, as well as the incrase in the tax capacity rate. Doris Merkert, 1840 Lakeview Terrace, expressed a similar complaint and stated their income has actually been reduced, but their taxes keep going up along with tne value of the home. Jabbour explained the State tax system formerly used a three tier system, but the higher tier has been eliminated and the balance absorbed by the lower tier. Callahan stated 98% of the problem comes from the Legislature. He suggested the property owners questioning their valuation appear at the Board of Review in the spring. James Staffenson, 4665 Wes‘: Branch Road, noted when he purchased his home in 1988 his taxes were $700 and now the taxes are $1,400. Moorse clarified that the $1,400 is the total tax bill for the property, not just the City’s portion. Jabbour stated when he first moved to Orono, his property Increased in value six times in four years, in part due to the fact that it became fashionable to move to Orono. He added, the State law mandates the City to keep the overall City valuation within a certain percentage of the appraised value, or the County will increase the Clty-wide value to that level. I MINUTES OF THE 1993 BUDGET HEARING CITY OF ORONO HELD DECEMBER 1, 1992 Dean Greimann, 3779 Casco Avenue, noted it was indicated that revenue is flat to stagnant, but noted many properties with new, and more expensive dwellings on them. Moorse stated that trend has not happened as much in the past couple years. He added, the overall City valuation has decreased in the last two years, in part due to the reduction in lakeshore valuations. Jabbour clarified *hat the City does not receive additional tax money from a newly developed property, but rather the taxes are spread among all properties. Bill Fox, 1095 West Ferndale Road, noted his City portion of tax has increased 21.69( yet the market value has remained the same. He noted the property is non-homestead. Moorse indicated that they can assume non-homestead property is also receiving a larger share of tax burden from the reduction of the three tier tax system. Kuehn suggested Fox contact the City office to review the formula used to calculate his taxes. Michael Johnson, 1461 Bayridge Road, stated he has also had a similar experience and noted he too would contact the City staff. Hurr questioned the amount budgeted for public safety and asked where the off-setting revenue Is reflected. Kuehn answered that the public safety includes budgets from fire, police, animal control, emergency preparedness, and building and zoning. Moorse said the revenue is reflected In the service revenue, a percentage of license fees, and property taxes. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to adopt Resolution #3208 adopting the 1993 Budget. Ayes 4, nays 0. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Callahan, to adopt Resolution #3209 approving the final 1992 tax levy collectible In 1993. Ayes 4, nays 0. MINUTES OF THE 1993 BUDGET HEARING CITY OF ORONO HELD DECEMBER 1, 1992 ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Jabbour» seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adjourn the 1993 Budget Hearing at 8:03 p.m. Ayes 4, nays 0. ATTEST: Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Dorothy M. Hal I in, City Clerk <1 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL ORONO COUNCIL MEETING h* HELD DECEMBER 1, 1992 r. j ROLL The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Peterson, Counci I members Gabriel Jabbour, Edward Callahan and Mary Butler. J. Diann Goetten was absent. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Ron Moorse, PubIIc Works Director John Gerhardson, Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Finance Director Tom Kuehn, Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 8:03 P.M. JoEllen Hurr presented the Council with a letter from the LMCD. Jabbour said, "nothing happened here until we forced them to do It. No meetings were held until we forced them to do it.“ He stated, "no meeting was called until many protests by Orono in public." He said, "I will not participate any further .f we are going to be stonewalled. The City of Orono needs to make a decision. If we are going to have our concerns basically stonewalled and echoed hoi low on the horizon, that’s fine. The City of Orono has always not been understood to its position, which is usually five or six months ahead of the next community. I don’t need to apologize for our behavior in the past, and because of our extreme scrutiny of the pro ss and the concerns of the lake, we have stood out alone many t is. This is not the first time." He added Gene Strommen has been very helpful In trying to understand the concerns of the City. Hurr indicated that a significant comment contained In the letter is that Cochran will ask the LMCD Board their feelings. She added, normally they don’t reaffirm or affirm appointments of a chairman, but Cochran has agreed to solicit comments from the LMCD. Jabbour asked If the Board members are aware of what has been happening. Hurr stated at the last Lake Access Committee meeting, 9 members were present and brought up to date, but they have not spent the time that she or Jabbour have spent on the issue and will not have the same perception. Mayor Peterson noted from day one. In reading the letter, nothing has changed Callahan stated the question is not really whether or not the City of Excelsior has passed a resolution, but rather whether It Is acceptable for the Chairman of a public body to stand before a public meeting at the City of Orono and announce that he was going to see that Excelsior did not have a public access. 1 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 1, 1992 Butler asked what Grathwol’s capacity is with the LMCD. Hurr stated he is Excelsior’s LMCO representative. She indicated he was also one of the original members of the LMCD, but his service to the organization had lapsed. Callahan said, “I think that Orono’s position on the matter, particularly as a result of Mr. Grathwol’s action at that meeting, has got to be made public." "The result of what he did, whether or not he intended to or not, is that the Planning Commission, which Is the Commission trying to see how we should deal with this Maxwell Bay project, unanimously has come to the position that they are not going to do anything about any kind of a plan until there is a fair plan about the lake. The activity of Mr. Grathwol, as far as the City of Orono is concerned, is extremely detrimental, and I think publicly, as the damage was done, we should make it clear to the LMCD what we think of the facts." It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to sand a letter to the LMCD, generally along the lines which are presented In draft form, with the proposed language modifications, essentially pointing out what the City objects to Mr. Grathwoi’s statements, and that Orono wouid like Mr. Grathwol to resign, and that Orono would like to have some objective standards ensuring that a future chair would be fair. Butler felt the letter gave the Impression that the author was peeved. She said, "one of the things she has learned is "do not make Idle threats unless you are absolutely sure of your position, and you are absolutely confident that you can follow through. I don’t see where the City of Orono has a legal posture In this scenario." She added, the man stated his opinion, and she felt he has a right to do so, whether Orono agrees with it or not. She suggested thinking hard before sending the letter. Callahan stated, during an executive session after the last Counci I meeting, the City Attorney was not prepared to answer the question whether the City could sue the LMCD. Callahan felt the right Orono is trying to exercise is to gain a fair trial. He said he has more reason to th»nk that Orono might have the ability to get a remedy or at least to hold the activities of the LMCD up to scrutiny without being disgraced for having presented the matter. Butler felt they could achieve the same end, i.e. an awareness on the part of the LMCD of what the City of Orono views as the problem, without inferring the City will sue the LMCD. ■ MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 1, 1992 Jabbour explained he and many others have spent many hours working in partnership with the LMCD to change how they do things. But only when the LMCD was forced to do so, did they sit down with Orono to work on the management plan. He said the LMCD does not hold public hearings, they hold rituals. Most decisions are made through sub­ committees, and the Board is oblivious to what is happening. He said he is not hung up about the court issue, but he is definitely hung up on if the City sues the LMCD, under no circumstance the City will spend one single dollar of the budget to subsidize defending the LMCD against Orono. He added, "at one point the City of Orono and its citizenship, has to look at this AILING AGENCY to figure out how we are going to go on, because erroneous amounts of person hours are being spent on it. I tried to have a meeting with every single LMCD representative on the Board. Some of them gave me audiences, and some of them did not, to ask them to participate in this process, and not have it so warped.” It was mt d by Callahan, to amend his motion to delete Paragraph 2, Page 5 "should you find It. . .", and on Page 6 "the City of Orono will take such steps. . .issue a report.” There was not a second. Motion failed. Callahan stated he would like the letter delivered to the LMCD by noon the next day. Hurr reminded them that the Chair has volunteered to put the question to a vote, and if the letter is not sent, the LMCD will not feel like Orono forced the Board to do so. They would feel like they have done it on their own merits. Jabbour stated he does not trust the LMCD to handle anything important to the City. He felt it important for the City to separate themselves from the LMCD. Mayor Peterson felt they should wait to deliver the letter until after the Board meeting to see how the LMCD does handle the Issue. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, by noon on December 2nd to send the letter to the LMCD and to each Chief Executive Officer of each City, with the language changes indicated, and Paragraph 2 on Page 5 to be deleted from the letter along with the sentence on Page 6. Ayts 3, nays 1. Mayor Peterson voted nay. Jabbour thanked Strommen for his efforts. Strommen stated he has attempted to do whatever he can to keep the cooperative relationship going between the City of Orono and the LMCD. MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 1» 1992 Butler said, "the State Legislature was the only thing that keep me from dumping the LMCO when I sat up here as the Mayor, because it has been^ thorn in my side one way or another for a long time. This is not ^the first instance of unresponsiveness that has passed through these halls by any stretch." Jabbour felt if the LMCO is to survive in any shape or form, they must start understanding the perception of the cities of them. FUEL TANKS Moorse submitted a picture of a fuel tank proposed. He noted the berm will be used to screen one side of the tank, and trees will be planted to further screen it from the road. Jabbour stated the split bladder tank will save the City $6,900. Moorse stated prior to a final decision, they need to make sure the soil can accommodate the tank. Jabbour felt that should not be a problem. Qerhardson indicated there will not be a payback on this progreun. Jabbour stated they were aware that the City could buy gas as cheap from a station. It was moved by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Jabbour, to authorize the purchase of a 6,000 gallon split bladder fuel tank for an amount of $48,456, conditioned on the supply company. Pump and Meter, not charging the City a cancellation fee for the original order. Ayes 4, nays 0. OTHER ISSUES Callahan called for a work session of the Council members and the newly elected officials to be held December 10, 1992 at 7:45 a.m. MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 1, 1992 ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to adjourn the special Orono City Council meeting at 9:02 p.m. Ayes 4, nays 0. ATTEST: Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Dorothy M. Hall In, City Clerk COUNCIL MEETirDl Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Ron Moorser City Administrator From: Date: DEC 1 4 1992 Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning December 10, 1992 Subject: Alternate Proposed Ordinance Revision - Section 5.42 Lake Use Committee Chair Callahan has suggested that the proposed Section 5.42 revisions dated December 2 perhaps need some additioneil time for consideration. As an alternative, he suggested that merely the portions of the existing section which are duplicated in the zoning chapter, be eliminated from the licensing chapter. Under this concept, the following subsections would be eliminated from Section 5.42: Subd. 4 B (Parking Requirements) Subd. 4 C (Landscaping of Yard Areas) Subd. 4 D, Items 1 and 2 (Landscaping Areas) Subd. 4 E (Suitable Sanitary Facility) Subd. 4 F (Access Roads) Subd. 4 G (Lighting) Subd. 4 H (Hours for Running Engines) Subd. 4 I (Hours of Operation) Subd. 4 J (Orderly Premises) Subd. 4 K (Garbage/Refuse Control) Subd. 4 L (Dock Standards) Subd. 4 M (Land Storage/Fuel Storage) An ordinance revision is attached which accomplishes removal of the above noted sections. Remaining in Subd. 4 is Subd. 4 (A) dealing with the number of boat slips; Subdivision 4 (D) (3) regarding bonding for landscaping improvements; and Subdivision 4 (N), a general statement about "other regulations". The paragraph regarding landscaping requirements would clearly be out of context, and in the proposed ordinance, I have further eliminated that section leaving Subdivision 4 with two entries. Isv ORDINANCE NO.SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE TO AffEND THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE BT DELETING PORTIONS OP SECTION 5.42, SUBDIVISION 4 RELATING TO BUSINESS USE STANDARDS FOR LAKE FACILITIES The City Council of Orono ordains as follows: Section 1. Section 5.42, Subdivision 4 is hereby deleted and the following language substituted in its place: Subd. 4. Business Use Standards. All business use applications shall provide information showing compliance with the following standards: A. The proposed number of boat slips on the land and on the water and boat buoys shall not adversely affect the public safety, health and welfare or infringe on the public right to use the water, or unreasonably restrict the rights of other property owners to store boats on or adjacent to the same area. B. Such other regulations pertaining to the operation of the applicant shall be met which promote the public health, safety and welfare. The Council shall be mindful of the past history of the conduct of the business by the applicant. Section 2. Adoption and Publication. This ordinance shall be published in the Pioneer and the Laker and shall become effective immediately upon publication. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota on this ’’4th day of December, 1992 by a vote of _ _ ayes and _ _ navs. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of December 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 1 of 1 TO: PROM: Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Lake Use Committee Ron Moorse, City Administrator Tom Barrettr City Attorney Jeanne A. Mabusth» Building 6 Zoning Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: SUBJECT: December 2, 1992 Proposed Ordinance Revision - Section 5.42 Business and Joint Use of Lake Facilities Attached is a draft amendment to Section 5.42 and an addition of Section 5.43 relating to joint use and marina business licensing. This amendment will appear on your December 14th agenda for adoption. The Lake Use Committee reviewed the existing Section 5.42 and determined that it would be appropriate to separate the joint use license section from the marina licensing. It was further suggested that the business use standards^ which are a duplication of the B-2 zoning district standardSf be eliminated from the business license section. The goal is a streamlined licensing procedure for marinas, with the intent that licenses will be issued as a matter of course, and any land use issues covered under the B-2 section will be dealt with as a land use matter. By continuing its former practice of granting licenses and then working with marinas to bring or keep their operations in compliance with the zoning standards, the City should be in a better position to gain complaince than by denying licenses without forcing unlicensed operations to cease. Please review the proposed language and feel free to advise me of any changes or additions which you feel are appropriate so that a final version can be considered for adoption on December 14th. Note that since Chapter 5 is not a zoning or subdivision code section, the Council may adopt this ordinance without the need for a public hearing or Planning Commission review. CotSt^se^ V^IOM IT fifPeA^f^ Cob^ SBC. 5.42. JOIMT USB OP LAKE FACILITIES. Subd. 1. Definitions. For the purpose of this Section, the following terms have the meanings given them: A. "Boat Slip, Water" means a structure, space, dock or other thing designed or used for the footing, storing of a boat temporarily or permanently in or on water, including mooring posts buoys or other devices. B. "Boa Slip, Land" means a structure, space or other thing designed i used |°f*,Vlo°J?ed o^^permanently on land adjacent to a lake, whether it is looateo off the licensed premises. C. "Boat Slip, Permanent" means a boat slip on land or water used for the s-oring of a given boat on a long-term or yearly basis. D. "Boat Slip, Transient" means a boat slip on land or water used for the temporary storage of many different boats or short ^rrriods of time. E. "Joint Use" means more than two activities: 1. More than two adjacent riparian landowners sharing in the use of a single dock. 2. An association of riparian Iha^iira dock°Td^rsy^^^^^ the mei^ers. 3. In the RS zoning district only, a not-for- irr“s\,-yer iretro/*^a overnight camping purposes. Subd. 2. License Required. It is unlawful for any person to engage or participate in joint use withowit first having obtained an annual license therefor from the City. Subd. 3. License Application. Any person or group of persons making application for a joint use license shall do so on forms provided by the City and shall provide such information as may be deemed necessary by the Council in order to ac-. on such application. The fee for license applications shall be set by ordinance. Subd. 4. Public Hearing, Upong filing of any application for license, the Council may call a hearing upon such notice as it may deem appropriate. No such hearing shall be mandatory, but wholly within the discretion of the Council, « . ept that a hearing shall be held at the request of the applicant in cases of license revocation or denial. Subd. 5. Joint Use Standards. Joint uses shall adhere to the following standards; A. Any association of riparian and/or non-riparian landowners within a subdivision adjacent to the lake which initiates a new joir.'i: use shall adhere to LMCD regulations and no such use shall have more than one boat slip per 50 feet of sh line as measured by a straight line between the points at w the side lot lines meet the OHWL. Further, all such use s. adhere to the Shoreland Management Regulations of Section 10. B. Any joint use in the RS zoning dist;yict by a not-for-profit organization or association providing transient boat slips for stakeholders of a property used for day-use recreation or overnight ca;.>ping purposes shall be allowcid only in conjunction with a valid conditional use permit for said use issued by the Council. C. Parking facilities not allowed. No joint use shall be approved which necessitates provision of parking stalls or which creates the need for parking on any street right-of-way. SECTION 2. Section 5.43 is hereby added as follows, SBC. 5.43 lrima business license . Subd. 1. Definitions. For the purpose of this section, the terms "Boat Slip, Water", "Boat Slip, Land", "Boat Slip, Permanent", and "Boat Slip, Transient" shall have the me«nxngs given them in Section 5.42. The following terms have the meanings given them: A. "Business Use" means engaging in either a marina business or the business of doc.k.,i ;i, mooring or storing boats . 1 B. "Marina Business" means engaging in one or more of the permitted, accessory or conditional uses allowed within the B-2 zoning district. C. "Business of Docking, Mooring or Storing Boats" means renting or otherwise providing space, including boat buoys, for docking, mooring or storing one or more boats belonging to persons other than the owner or occupant of the property, except when licensed as a joint use. Subd. 2. License Required. It is unlawful for any person to engage or participate in business use without first having obtained an annual license therefor from the City. Subd. 3. License Application. Any person or group of persons making license application for business use shall do so on forms provided by the City and shall provide sv'-h information as may be deemed necessary by the Council in order to act on such application. The fee for license applications shall be set by ordinance. Subd. 4. Public Hearing. Upon filing of any application for license, the Council may call a hearing upon such notice as it may deem appropriate. No such hearing shall be mandatory, but wholly within the discretion of the Council, except that a hearing shall be held at the request of the applicant in cases of license revocation or denial. Subd. 5. Business Use Standards. Businesses required be licensed under this section shall adhere to the requirements and performance standards of the B-2 zoning district and per the following provisions: A. Insurance Required. Bach business shall provide certification of liability insurance coverage for the duration of the license period. B. The primary business operator on the property shall be the licenseholder, and shall be responsible for notifying the City of any and all businesses subleased on the premises. Such secondary businesses shall not be separately licensed but shall be allowed only when in conformance with t.ie provisions of the B-2 zoning district standards. Subd. 6. Business Use Licenses Limited to B-2 Zone. No business use shall be licensed in any zoning district other than B- 2, except that when a business use is allowed by ordinance in another zoning district, such use conduct in said district shall not be required to obtain a license. ORDINANCE #2nd SERIES AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE BY REVISING SECTION 5.42 AND ADDING SECTION 5.43 RELATING TO BUSINESS AND JOINT USE OF LAKE FACILITIES The City Council of Ctrono ordains as follows: SECTION 1. Section 5.42 is hereby amended as follows: SBC. 5.42. BUSi^NBSS ANB JOINT USE OF LAKE FACILITIES. Subd. 1. Definitions. For the purpose of this Section, the following terms have the meanings given them: A. "Boat Slip, Water" means a structure, space, dock or other thing designed or used for the docking, mooring or storing of a boat temporarily or permanently in or on water, including mooring posts, buoys or other devices. B. "Boat Slip, Land" means a structure, space or other thing designed or used for storing a boat temporarily or permanently on land adjacent to a lake, whether it is located on or off the licensed premises. C. “Business of Boekingr Mooringr Storing Boats* means renting or otherwise providing spacer ineiuding boat buoysr for deekingr mooring or storing three or more boats beionging to persons other than the owner or occupant of the propertyr "Boat Slip. Permanent" means a boat slip on land or water used for the storing of ^ given boat on a long-term or yearly basis. D. “€ommerciai Boot Bock Business* means providing 3pace for dockingr mooring or storing boats for a feer or beats used in a trade or businessr inciudingj without iimitationr provid­ ing rented spaeesT boat buoysr space for keeping boats owned by the licensee and held for sal^/ displayr rentair or otherwise Med in connection with a boat or marina businessr space held for decking of beats during or pending repairs or maintenance of said beatST "Boat Slip, Transient" means a boat slip on land or water used for the temporary storage of many different boats for o^ort periods o^ time. E. *eommercial Bocks* means doeksr mooring spaeesr hioering pestsr mooring buoysr or boat slips used in commercial boat dock business or by one in the business of docking or storing boats as defined hereinr including all *els*r *T^s*r mooring poster or any ether structures related to the main doekr Joint Use means more than two adjacent riparian landowners joining the of using lakesHore property for swimming, bathing, fishing, docking or mooring boats, or for any other purpose. Joint use ^clude_s the 7ol lowing acti vities: More than two adjacent riparian landowners sharing in the use of a single dock. 2« An association of riparian and/or non- riparian landowners within a subdivision adiacent to the lake sharing a dock or dock system providing permanent boat slips for the members. ~ f 3» In the RS zoning district only^ a not-for- rofit organization or association providing transient boat slips or stakeholders "or a property used for day use recreation or overnight camping purposes. Ft Use* means more than two persons joining for the purpose of using iakeshore property for swimraingr bathingr fishingr docking or mooring boatsr or for any other purposer Gt ^Business Hse^ means engaging in the business of doekengr moori^'g or storing boatsr or a eommereiai boat dock businessT Subd. 2. License Required. It is unlawful for any person to engage or participate in business use or joint use without first having obtained ^ annual license therefor from the City. Subd. 3. Pubiie Hearingr L^pon fiiing of any application for license the eouncil may call a hearing upon such notice as it may deem apprepriater Providedr that no such hearing shall be mandateryr but wholly within the discretion of the eouncilr License Application. Any person or group of persons making application for a joint use license shall doso on forms provided by the City and shal 1 provide such information as may be deemed necessary by the Counci 1 in order to act on such applicatibnT The fee for license applications shall be set by ordinance. Subdr 4t Business Use Standardsr Ail business use applications shall provide information showing compliance with the following standards-r At The proposed number of boat slips on the land and on the water and beat buoys shall not adversely affect the pubiie safetyr health and welfare or infringe on the pubiie right to use the waterr or unreasonably restrict the rights of other property owners to store beats on or adgaeent to the same arear B t The proposed vehicular off-street parking facilities shall be sufficient to eliminate any traffic or parking congestion likely to be caused by the business of *he applicantr The parking areas need not be pavedr The min^'*»um parking requirements shall be as followST It Six parking spaces shall be provided for each ten boat slips on water or on landr 2t At least eight off-street parking spacesj pitts one additional space for each 60© sgaare feet of floor area over 1 t©0© feet- inelading warehoasingT and all oatside sales and storage areas related to the sales and service fanetionsr 6t if the proposed ase is to inelade the iaanehing of boats owned by the pablie for the day from trailersr ten additional aato-traiier parking spaces shall be provided for each rampr 4t The reqaired parking spaces may not be separated by a pablie roadway from the doekr storage spacer mooring spacer floor spacer or ramp they are designed to server 5r Reqaired off-street parking space may not be atilised for open storage of goods or for the storage of boatsr except that from ectober 1 to May 1 each yearr the reqaired off- street parking may be ased for winter storage of boats provided that a©% of the reqaired. parking spaces remain as a fanctional parking 6r Parking may not be allowed in any reqaired yard or landscaping arear €t The minimam reqaired yard areas for the ase district shall be landseaped and planted with evergreen and deeid- aeas shrabs and trees in aeeordanee with a detailed landscape planr Bt in addition to the landscaping reqaired in the reqaired yard areas for that ase distrietr the following landseaping areas shall be landscaped in accordance with the following provisionsr It The minimam landseaping areas shall be as fellewst- 4al The lakeshere landseaping area shall be an area that is parallel to the entire lakeshore adjacent to the licensed marina operation and eqaal to 10% of the average lot depthr bat in no ease shall be less than 1© feet nor more than ?6 feetr Breaks in the landseaping area for oceess to the lake shall not exceed an aggre­ gate width of 3© feet for each licensed marina operationr 4bl Side yard landseaping area shall be an area that is parallel to the side lot line and not within the lakeshore landseaping area or front yard landseaping area and shall not be less than 1© feet deepr icT Front yard landscaping area shall be an area that is parallel to the street or opposite the landshore landscaping area and shall not be less than 1© feet deepr Breaks in the landseaping area for access to the pablie read shall not exceed an aggregate width of 5© feet for each licensed marina operationr 3t The detailed landscape plan for each land— seaping area shall provide for a nataral woods area containing primarily evergreen and deeidaoas trees not less than 6 feet in heightr Shrabs not less than 2 feet in height shall be interdis- persed among the trees so as to eventaally provider nt matarityr a nataral screen that will not be less than 5©% opaqae daring the summer months- No ases may be allowed in the landseaping areas I except the required iandseaping and access roads as provided for by this Seetionr A privacy fence may be required in addition to the natural landscapinq which has been planted to meet the requirements of this Seetionr The use of any fencing shall not satisfy the requirement of providing natural landscaping and solid visual sereening- Any yard area requiring landscaping to meet the requirements of this Section shell be planted with nursery stoehT balled and bagged trees and shrubs in accordance with a detailed landscaping plan approved by the eouncilr All landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy growing eonditionr 3t All the improvements in the landscaping plan or otherwise as approved by the Souneil shall be bonded at times the listed cost of the improvements in order to insure that the proposed improvements will be completed before dune 1 of the year for which the license is requiredr Bt Suibable sanitary facilities connected to public sanitary sewer or to a private on-site sewage disposal syatemr which complies with all City Code provisions and agency regula- tionsT shall be provided on the premises for men and wemenr and furtherr suitable facilities =jhail be provided for the disposal of wastes accumulated in boats docked or serviced at the mariner Pt Insofar as praeticablor all means of access to the operation from any street shall be so located and designed as to avoid the routing of vehicles from the property over streets that primarily serve abutting residential areasr All aeeess roads from the operation to any public paved roadway shall be paved for a distance of at least 30 feet adgaeent to the public roadway to minimise dust and noise conditionsr Ail aeeess roads from the operation to any unpaved public roadway shall be treated to minimise dust conditions at least to the extent the unpaved pubise roadway is dust controlledr Ct The lighting shall be shielded so that no direct glare can be seen from adjoining resideneesT from the lake or from the roadway? Ht The hours for running engines or operating any beat engine for the purpose of charging batteriesr auxiliary equipment or testing shall be between the hours of o-*-eioek AtMt and 6?e9 o-*-eioek PtM? It The maximum hours of operation shall be 9vO0 oxeioek AtMt to o^eloek PtMtt fov retail sales and service funetionsT except as necessary to support normal fishing activity or private use of the boats stored on the premisesT unless other permission is fry-* •*ifieally granted by the CouneilT j. Persons in charge shall at all times keep the deekST sea wailsr and premises in a neat and orderly manner and free from trash? rubbish? repair parts? machinery? equipment and debris of all kindsr Rt Persons in charge shaii prohibit the damping or throwing of garbager paperr bottiesT eansj refnse or debris into waterwayr Persons in charge of mooring areas shaii provide garbage cans of saffieient sie$_fco--heid'garbage or refase to be eoiieetedr £>t No eommereiai docks or boat baoys shaii extend farther into the waters of any iake than is reasonabiy necessary to aeonmodate the decking and mooring of each crafts as shaii castemariiy and iawfaiiy be ased apon the iake or so as to interfere withr obstraetr or tend to obstraetr or render dangeroas for ase or passage a body of water within the primary harbor iimits the Sityx The iength of decks and ieeatien of baoys shaii be regaiated by the City or other appiieabie iawsr Aii each eommereiai decks and wharves shaii be eonstraeted and maintained of aaeh materiais and of each type of eenstraetien as wiii net render them ansafe or iikeiy to endanger pabiie engoyment of the watersr €emmereiai decks shaii be maintained in a neat and orderiy manner at aii timesr Mt if eatside boat siip iiandi storage faeiiities are previdedr the boats shaii be stored in saeh manner that they do not create a fire hasardx Any eatside straetare for parpese of storage of beats may not exceed if feet in heightr Bry beat storage areas may net be ieeated in the reqaired yards or iandseaping areasr Any gaseiine offered for saie or stored on the premises shaii be piaeed in tanks or containers as may be reqaired by the SeaneiiT and saeh tanks or containers shaii be stored andergreand or aaeh distance from the storage faeiiities so as net to create a danger to the eemmanityT The premises shaii at aii times be maintained in a neat and orderiy mannerr Nr Saeh ether regaiatiens pertaining to the operation of the appiscant shaii be met which promote the pabiie heaithr safety and weifarer The Soaneii shaii be mindfai of the past history of the eondaet of the basiness by the appiicantr Subd. 4, Pub lie Hearing. Upong filing of any application for license^ the Council may call a hearing upon such notice as it may deem appropriate. No such hearing shall be mandatory# but wholly within the discretion of the Counci1# except that a hearing sha? 1 be hel^ ^ the request of the applicant in cases of license revocation or denial. Subd. 5. Joint Use Standards. Joint uses sha11 adhere ^ the following standards; A. Any association of riparian and/or non-riparian landowners within a subdivision adjacent to the lake which initiates a new joint use shall adhere to LMCD regulations and no such use sha 11 have more than one boat slip per 50 feet of shoreline as measured by ~a straight line between the points at yhich the sTde lot lines meet the OHWL. Further# a 11 such use shal 1 adhere to the Shoreland Management Regulations of SectionToTFe. - - - - - - - - - -^- - - -^- - - - - - - - - - - i' Vi. t- B, Any joint use in the RS zoning district by a not-for-profit organization or association providing transient slips for staTceholders oi a property used for day-use recreation or overnfght"camping puFposes shall be allowed only in coniunccign With a T^lid conditTonal use permit for said use issued by the Council. C« Parking facilities not allowed. No joint use shall be approved which necessitates provision of parking stalls or w^icIT creates the need"Tor parking on any street right-of-way. SECTION 2. Section 5.43 is hereby added as follows: SBC. 5.43.LBH ISIHBSS LICBWSB. Subd. 1. Definitions. For the purpose of this sectioUf the terms "boat Slip, Water**t "Boat Slip, Land", "Boat Slip, P^manent", and "Boat Slip, Transient" shal l have the meanings given them in Section 5.42. The following terms have the meanings given them: A.Business Use" means engaging in either a marina business or the business of docking, mooring or storing boats. t ! B. "Marina Business" means engaging in one or more of the permitted, accessory or conditional uses alTowed~^tKTn""^e TP2 zoning ciistrict. C. "Business of Docking, Mooring or Storing Boats* means renting or otherwise providing space, inclu31ng bo^ buoysj. for docking, mooring or storing one or more boats belonging to persons other than the owner or occupant of the property, except when lfcense<iL as a joint use. f Subd. 2^ License Reguired. It is unlawful for any erson to engage or participate in business use without f aving obtained an annual license therefor from the City. Subd. 3. License Application. Any person or group of persons making license application for business use shall ^ so o^ forms provided b^ the City and shal l provide su^ information ^ may be deeme3~necessary by the Council in order ^ act on such application. The fee for license applications shal l be set b^ orainance . Subd. 4. Public Hearing. Upon filing of any application for license, the Council mv call ~a hiring upon such notice m it may deem appropriate. No such hearing shal l be mandat ory, but i^lIF~within the discretion of the Counci 1, except^at a hearing shail ^be he IB at the reguest of the applicant in cases oF license revocation or denial . Subd. 5. Business Use Standards. Businesses required to be licensed under this section shall adhere to the requirements and pertqrmance standards of the b-T zoning "Zistrict and per tHe following provisions; A» Insurance Required. Each business sha 11 provide certification of iiab£lity insurance coverage for the duration of the license period. B. The primary business operator on the property shall be the licenseholderr and shall be responsible for notifying Suchthe City of any and all businesses subleased on the premises. __ secondary businesses shall not be separately licensed but shall be allowed only when in conformance with the provisions of the B-2 zoning district standards Subd, 6. Business Use Licenses Limited to B~2 Zone. No business use shall be licensed in any zoning district other than B- 2. except that \^en a business use is a1lowed by ordinance in another zoning district, such use conducted in said district sHalT not be required to obtain a license. SECTION 3. Adoption and Publication. This ordiance shall be published in THE PIONEER and THE LAKER and shall become effecti^^e immediately upon publication. Adopted by the City Council of Orono on the 14th day of December. 1992 by a vote of ayes and _ _ _ nays. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson. Mayor i TOs Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse^ City Administrator Jeanne A, Mabusth^ Building & Zoning Administrator 0^ I December 10, 1992 0/r^ #1706 William and Evelyn Knapp, 4300 Bayside Road - t Final Subdivision/PRD - Resolution *^(J The subdivider has fulfilled all conditions of preliminary subdivision approval and has submitted all required easements, covenants and a fully executed developer's agreement. CounciImembers may remember that the road name was approved at the June 22nd meeting as Cristofori The plat name is Cristofori Woods. Staff recommends approval of the three unit PRD final subdivision application of WilljLam and Evelyn Knapp subject to the findings and conditions set forth in the attached staff resolution. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF CRISTOFORI NOODS AND GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.27, SUBDIVISION 3 (A) FILE NO. 1706 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal 'corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a three unit Planned Residential Development and subdivision of a plat by William P. Knapp and Evelyn S. Knapp (hereinafter the subdividers); and WHEREAS, the subdivision for the Planned Residential Development (hereinafter ’’PRD") has been found to meet all pertinent standards of the RR-IA Zoning District, on-site septic and PRD codes that will allow the continued and future sin*jle family residential uses to be fully developed without the need of any variances to the Orono zoning code or to the special development standards adopted for the PRD; and WHEREAS, the subdividers have completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including; 1. Completion of all the requirements of Resolution No. 3069, a resolution granting preliminary approval of the three unit PRD and subdivision. 2. Dedication on the plat of right-of-way for a public road shown as County Road No. 84 or Bayside Road. 3. Creation of a new private road shown on the plat as Outlet C to be known henceforth as Cristofori Circle. 4. Concurrent with the creation of this private road, the subdividers have dedicated to the City a road and utility easement granting to the City permanent access, improvement and utility easements over said outlet; the subdividers have Page 1 of 4 created non-exclusive ingress, egress drainage and utility easements over said outlot in favor of all abutting and/or benefiting lots including a declaration of certain maintenance covenants wherein each of the abutting or benefiting lot owners, covenant and agree to permanently maintain and pay the cost of maintenance for said private road. 5. Dedication to the City of a drainage easement providing for limitations on the use of retention areas and drainage ways described therein and shown on the plat as drainage easements . 6. Dedication to the City of an open space easement over Outlots A and B, Cristofori Woods, in order to fulfill area credit for planned residential development within the RR-IA Zoning District. 7. Dedication of a utilities and access easement via Lot 1, Block 1 and Outlot B of Cristofori Woods granting to the City access to the adjacent Nature Conservancy property that is currently landlocked. 8. Execution of a subdividers agreement providing for installation of certain improvements as a condition of subdivision approval. 9. Payment to the City of a park dedication fee in the amount of $200.00. 10. Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat, easements and covenants in the amount cf $150.00. 11. Payment to the City for the filing of the final subdivision application in the amount of $350.00. NOW, THBRBPORB, D£ IT RBSOLVBb, *hat the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of c.t?isto?ori Woods, Hennepin County, Minnesota, subject to the fol 'wing conditions: 1. In the approval of the three unit Plann^’i Residential Development for Cristofori Woods^ the following special development standards have been approved by the City: Page 2 of 4 a. Residential construction setbacks are as follows: 50' front and rear 30' side 50' from Outlot D 26'from all areas designated as drainage easements b. No residential construction or land alteration shall be allowed within areas that exceed 18% slope. c. Accessory structures may be located in front of the front line of the principal structure on Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2. 2. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or Registrar of Titles Office on or before June 14, 1993 together with a certified original copy of this Resolution and executed copies of the easements and covenants noted above. The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by th>- date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated this 14th day of December, 1992, ATTEST: i i Dorothy M, Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of December, 1992, Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 4 r:I I1^0 wMNCSOtA MSicm MAAWAn. ^ccxmtmK n oocum C ni ^ «nM>«•c CAiT i»< er wc *w»/« er ix sc »/* » *^ **• N 0®27 ‘ 42"V.' /o o V • I' V \N r* v>- . 'A . ‘v /» ?^fEsiiO^ CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3069 A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A CLASS III SUBDIVISION AND PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.27, SUBDIVISION 3 (A) CONCEPTUALLY APPROVES A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PRD OF 3 RESIDENTIAL UNITS FILE NO. 1470 & 1706 WHEREAS, Wxlliam F. Knapp and Evelyn S. Knapp (hereinafter "the applicants”) have an interest in the subdivision application filed on September 22, 1989 and on December 24, 1991 filed a conditional use permit for a Planned Residential Developement with the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") for the purpose of platting 3 residential units, open space outlets, private driveway and private road outlets. The property is legally described as follows: See Exhibit A attached to this resolution, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter "the property") and; WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 and the City of Orono Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held public hearings on October 16, 1989 , January 16, 1990 and January 21, 1992 at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on February 10, 1992 the Orono City Council considered this subdivision application and conditional use permit for a Planned Residential Development, noting the following findings of fact: 1.The property is currently zoned RR-IA, Single Family Rural Residential. This district is intended to allow a combination of low density residential development and limited agricultural activity. 2.This property consists of 17.06 acres. There is a major drainageway or ravine that intersects the property. Major portions of steeply sloped topographies make up the remaining dry buildable lands. 3.The unusual shape of the property prevents the property from being developed under lot standards for a conventional plat. Page 1 of 6 I n // //a \y ' \ V ».ro>-5k' w. th f • // \\r^ \''i>'.i^,-\ ^ CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________ 4. Per Section 10.32r Subdivision 2: Allowed per total acreage = 3 units (total acreage ® 17.06 acres) Proposed = 3 units 5. All lots shall be served by the new private road, Outlot C, and private driveway, Outlot D. All structures within PRD shall be located 50 feet from Outlot D. 6. Each residential pad has been found to have suitable soils for both a principal and alternate on-site septic drainfield. Septic drainfield areas have been located within each individual building pad. 7. The subdivider shall grant access easements to the Nature Conservancy property and the property to the northeast that is landlocked. 8. The City has approved special setbacks for all residential construction within each defined building pad or lot as shown on the preliminary plat as follows: 50' front/rear 30' side 26’ from easement designating drainageway/ravine. 9. The City has recommended that a road corridor to the Luce Line not be provided and that access to the Asac and Deters property to the immediate northwest need not be provided via this property at the time of this plat. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat of Bayside Woods per plat drawings by Hansen Thorp Pellinen Olson Inc. dated September 12, 1989, revised September 7, 1990, and conceptually grants a conditional use permit for a Planned Residential Development of 3 single family detached dwellings, subject to the following conditions: 1. Outlots A and B shall be set aside as area credit for the 3 unit Planned Residential Development known as Bayside Woods. Applicant shall create open space, flowage and conservation easements over said outlots. Samples of such easements have been enclosed for applicants use. Page 2 of 6 o o V A w %:<!>' 1 v-^ r/-v'^ "S' VesHO^t I I CITYof ORONO 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3069 _______ Outlet C shall be developed as a private road at a 50' width. Said road shall be built per City standards except that the cul- de-sac area of the road shall be developed in a loop design so as to minimize impact on existing trees and steeper elevations. Subdivider is advised that building permits for new residential construction cannot be issued by the City until bed of private road has been installed and approved by the City. Road construction cannot commence until the subdivider has submitted engineering plans and t^e engineering plans have been approved by the City Engineer. In addition, subdivider shall execute a Developer's Agreement (see sample enclosed) and post a Letter of Credit (see sample enclosed) to be written to 150% of the cost of road improvement. Outlet D shall serve as the private driveway outlet to be platted at a 30' width. Road to be constructed to a 16' width based on the topographic concerns and location of mature densely populated trees. It is strongly recommended that the private driveway be constructed at the same time private road is constructed. Developer's Agreement and Letter of Credit will not cover private driveway construction. Drainage easement to be taken over portion of Outlot B that divides Lots 1, Block 1 and 2. In addition the City shall ask for a 30' wide drainage easement within Lot 1, Block 1 over drainageway that runs from south to north. Special construction setbacks approved with this PRD are as follows: 50' front and rear 30' side 50' from Outlot D. It should also be noted that a 26' setback shall be required from the drainage easement that is located between the shared lot lines of Lots 1, Block 1 and 2 and drainageway that intersects Lot If Block 1. No residential construction or land alterations shall be allowed within areas that exceed 18% slope. Accessory structure may be located in front of the front line of the principal structure on Lots 1, Block 1 and 2. Page 3 of 6 I // \\ \ ih CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 9. 10. 11. 8. Dedication of 33* of right-of-way for Bayside Road. County has asked for an additional 7' dedication. The Comprehensive Plan defines this portion of Bayside Road as a collector road. Maximum right-of-way width shall be maintained at 66' width. Subdivider to grant open space easement over Outlets A and B, shared/commonly owned open space areas of PRD^ open space easement to include access easement to Nature Conservancy property to northwest. Easement to be created over narrowed of Lot Ir Block 1 and Outlet A and at a minimum 20' width. See sample enclosed. Applicant to select name for road. See form attached. Road name approval is a separate action of Council. As soon as applic.:nt has selected name choices, staff shall schedule applicants request before the Council. (See sample attached.) Please refer to enclosed covenant for maintenance of privai roads. Applicant may wish to include language within private covenants for Planned Residential Development. Applicant has option to either execute enclosed covenant or to include in comprehensive covenants for PRD. Please note your covenants should include upkeep and maintenance of shared open space areas within Outlets A and B. 12. PINAL PLAT SUBMITTALS: The final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows: A. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City's records and one for filing with Hennepin County). In addition, (1) copy reduced to 1"=200’. Drawing to include: 1) All items as specified in the appropriate conditions noted above; i.e. private road outlot to be at a 50' width, private driveway outlot at a 30* width. Lots to be designated as shown on drawings by Hansen Thorp Pellinen Olson Inc. 2) Drainage easement shown over area of Outlot B that divides Lots 1, Block 1 and 2 and over drainageway within Lot 1, Block 1 at a 30' minimum width. Page 4 of 6 V * ,' ^ V •> . }V. • -, A il V'?*esB0t CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.3069 3) Dedication of 33’ of right-of-way for Bayside Road. 4) 10' wide drainage and utility easements along perimeter of all lot lines. 5) Rename plat as City already has a plat named Bayside Woods. Upon the submission of all final submittals, applicant is to provide confirmation that new access easement to serve property to northeast is included within outlet. B. OTHER SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: 1) Executed open space easement over Outlets A and B to include access easement to City to Nature Conservancy property. 2) Executed Drainage Easement over defined drainageways. 3) Road name request form completed. CITY if ORQHO 4) Executed Developer's Agreement and Letter be written to 150% of the cost of constructioft'^oT litCEll'T-lHm YOU 5) Private Road Maintenance Covenant. 6) Covenants for PRD. 7) Executed Road and Utility Easement over Outlot C, private road. 13. FINAL PLAT FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $500.00 A. $200.00 park dedication fee. Note preliminary subdivision application was filed prior to the new Park Dedication Ordinance approved by Council on April 30, 1990. ($100.00 for each residential unit at 5+ acre unit density) B. Final plat fee = $150.00 C. Filing of plat and associated documents = $150.00 Page 5 of 6 \\ -1^V‘*'’;'’S:)"^«;K<5’;'/ // CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _________ Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 10th day of Februaryr 19 Preliminary subdivision approval shall expire one year fi^m the date of this approval# February 10# 1993. Failure to year deadline shall require the filing of a new subdivision application with the City. Barbara A. Peterson# Mayor The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of February# 1992# Barbara A. Peterson 6 Dorothy M. Hallin# Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono# a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. CAROU A. MASOMN HENNEPIN COUNTY UY CCi^UISSON EXPIRES MSflS Notary Public Page 6 of 6 o \o A r. ^ '%<resHO«^ CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 3069NO. EXHIBIT A The Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the /o^^^heast Quarter of Section 31, Township 118, Range 23, West of the 5tn Principal Meridian. That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 117, Range 23, West of the 5th Principal Meridian described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest corner of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 6; thence east along the northerly line of said Section 6 a distance of 514 feet to the point of beginning of to be described; thence deflecting to the right 117 degrees 30 minutes a distance of 589 feet to the centerline of County Road No. 84; thence deflect left along said centerline a distance of 180.00 feet; thence deflect left 81 degrees 19 minutes a distance of 662.11 feet to a point on the north line of said Section 6 distance 216.55 feet east of the point of beginning; thence west along said north line a distance of 216.55 feet to the point of beginning. The East 1/2 of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 31, Township 118, Range 23, situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 PUBLIC COMMENTS - CONT. Mayor Peterson asked Moorse to have the Police Chief contact Mr. Madge regarding his concerns. Goetten reminded them that Orono Is a rural area, and agreed that the Council should address Madge’s problem but did not feel a need to change the ordinance. (#4) #1470 & #1706 WILLIAM & EVELYN KNAPP, 4300 BAYSIDE ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION/PRD - RESOLUTION #3069 William and Evelyn Knapp were present for this application. given In placing accessory structures in front of the front lin of the principal structure. Knapp stated that the existing residence on the property to be expanded to be In keeping with the surrounding neighborhood properties. Mabusth noted that the current code does not allow a credit for dry buildable of areas in excess of 18X slopes. The stated that you cannot build In such areas. She explained that this condition was Imposed to minimize the impact fha nrooertv She felt that a detailed survey would show areas where the existing residence could be expanded which would be out of the 18X slope limitation area. Goetten asked why they should grant a variance for accessory structures In advance. Mahii«th Indicated that they were creating restricted building setbacks She ^oted that with a PRD Is it common to create special se Sacl^s: w®e h2d already In ^VoTl of a p£oproposed 2 to 3 acre pads. It should be the goal of a PRD to minimize future variances. 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1992 ZONING FILE #1470 & #1706 - CONT. Mayor Peterson asked how the Planning Commission felt on this issue. Mabusth indicated there was no discussion on this issue by the Planning Commission. Bellows stated tnit the Issue was not clear to the Commission. She felt t. at when creating a PRD, parameters for development should be established at the beginning. Mabusth noted that In addition to the 50’ setback fi-oi" ^e lot line for an accessory structure, she is recommending a 50 setback from the private drive be established. Resolution #3069 to be amended to include special setbacks for accessory structures for Application #1470 and #1706 Evelyn Knapp, 4300 B-''side Road, granting preliminary approval of a Class III subdivii ^n and conceptually approving a conditional use permit for a PRD of 3 residential units. Ayes 4, nays 0. Knapp thanked staff for all the hard work they have done with regards to this application. (#5) #1661 S. MCCLOUD, RFCORD LOTS 16 AND 22, BIG ISLAND - sGbDIVISION of a lot line REARRANGEMENT - RESOLUTION #3070 Moorse exp Ialned that this applicat ion is a lot line rearrangement, which provides legal lake access for a parcel. Gaffron noted that in 1983 when the City designated Big Isiand, Record Lot 22 retained a strip along the Iakeshore adjacent to another parcel. That strip will now be combine ilth the adjacent parcel. He noted once that has been City will grant tne automatic lot area variance to both parcels. He noted that the application had received preliminary from the Planning Commission prior to the adoption of the subdivision moratorium. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Mayor Pjf^erson, to adopt Resolution #3070 for Application #1661 for S. McCloud, Record Lots 16 and 22, Big Island, for a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement. Ayes 4, nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 22, 1992 (*#3) #1679 WILLIAM MILLER, 2691 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3134 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten. to “<ioP‘ iaiM fo? Application »1679 for William Miller of 2691 Casco Point Road aoorovina variances to permit the structural repair of a gazebo/bathhouse structure and the proposed construction detached garage. Ayes b, nays 0. (#4) #1706 WILLIAM KNAPP, 4300 BAYSIDE ROAD - ppn/<;t)nniVlSION - REQUEST TO NAME PRIVATE ROAD lfw^LToved®b°y Mayor%eterson. seconded <50®”®" tV°e""ls°to%rr! name Cristoforl Circle for the private road within the CrIstoTori Woods plat. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#5) #1732 JOAN SWEETSER, 845 OLD LONG LAKE ROAD - FINAL SUBDIVISION — RESOLUTION #3135 Joan Sweetser was present. She explained that the assessed v^^^^ for the 9 acre parcel was $94,300 for 1992, and ooo being divided off Is now being assessed at f She also noted the Park Commission Is requesting a 619 bike tr easement along the property line. Gerhardson explained that the bike easement will ‘»® existing drainage easement, as was done with the Shadowood Plat. Jabbour felt that the Impact of having bikers going over her land is different than the Impact of a drainage easement. Mayor Peterson clarified that this may not ever be used as a bike tralI. Gerhardson concurred and explained that this area Is Included as part of a comprehensive bike trail system. Callahan felt the value of the easement should be reduced from the land valuation. sime as the assessed valuation for the property. Callahan asked Sweetc property. has a purchase agreement for the To: Fron: Date: Subject: 7 Mayor Peterson and City Counc'l Ron Moorse, City Administrator * f.' Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building fi Zoning Administrato^^^ ^ ^ 1SS2 December 9, 1992 ;;; #1749 James F. Lawrence, 1550 Sixth Avenue North - Final Subdivision - Resolution The applicant has fulfilled all conditions of Resolution No. 3148, preliminary subdivision resolution granting approval of a two-lot plat. A condition of the preliminary subdivision approval required that applicant file a conditional use permit for second non-rental residential unit on property. Review Resolution No. 3177, the resolution granting a conditional use permit dated September 14, 1992. Staff recommends approval of the plat, Tanglewood Second Addition, subject to the findings and conditions set forth in the enclosed staff resolution. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF TANGLEHOOD SECOND ADDITION PILE NO. 1749 i\ i1 I ■' HHEREASr the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a two-lot plat by James F. Lawrence, hereinafter (the subdivider); and WHEREAS, on September 14, 1992, the Orono City Council adopted Resolution No. 3177 granting approval of a conditional use permit to allow the continued use of a second residential structure on the property for guest house use per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 3; and WHEREAS, pursuant to declaration Document No. 1368041, proposed Lot 2, Block 1, Tanglewood Second Addition shall share in the maintenance of the road and all other improvements within the Tanglewood Plat, including a share in the ownership of Tanglewood Road; and WHEREAS, the subdivision has been found to meet all standards of the RR-IB Rural Residential Zoning District finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that will allow the continued use and future single family residential use to be developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, the subd.ivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including; 1. Completion of all the requirements of Resolution No. 3148, the resolution granting preliminary approval of tfte plat. 2. Dedication to the City of a drainage easement: providing for limitations on the use of a wetland/pond on Lot 1, Slock 1, Tanglewood Second Addition and shown on the plat as "drainage easements". Page 1 of 3 3. Payment to the City of a park dedication fee in the amount of $3,064.00. 4. Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat and easement in the amount of $200.00. 5. Payment to the City for the filing fee of the final subdivision application of $175.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of Tanglewood Second Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, subject to the following conditions: 1. Access to Lot 1, Block 1, Tanglewood Second Addition shall remain via Tract E of RLS 1418. Access to Lot 2, Block 1, Tanglewood Second Addition shall be via Tanglewood Road. Subdivider shall grant l/6th interest in Outlot A, Tanglewood, Hennepin County, Minnesota at the time property is conveyed to new owner. 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for new construction on Lot 2, the alternate drainfield site must be staked and protected prior to any land a Iterations on the property. Future owner of Lot 2 must obtain a permit from the Public Works Director for the installation of a curb cut onto Tanglewood Road. 3. Lot 1, Block 1, Tanglewood Second Addition is classified as a through lot. The owner is hereby advised that a conditional use permit is required for the construction of all future accessory structures. 4. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or Registrar of Titles Office on or before June 14, 1993 together with a certified original copy of this resolution and executed copy of the easement noted above. Page 2 of 3 The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated this 14th day of December, 1992, ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of December 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 3 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 10, 1992 ZONING FILE #1746 - CONT. Callahan clarified that It is the feeling of the Council that It Is alright for people to violate the hardcover ordinance, as long as they promise to give It up when they die or sell the property. # Jabbour felt they were improving the situation by ensuring that the tennis court would be removed at some point. Callahan felt they were accepting a bad policy. Goetten asked If they were legally setting a precedent. Callahan stated they were setting a bad precedent. Lowe added that he is giving a 1+ acre parcel of land In exchange for 500 s.f. of additional structural hardcover. («#4) #1748 BOB HOVLANO, 1245 NORTH ARM DRIVE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - REQUEST TO BE REFERRED BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Callahan, to refer Application #1748 for Bob Hovland, 1245 North Arm Drive, back to the Planning Commission for additional review. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#5) #1749 JAMES F. LAWRENCE, 1550 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION #3148 Mrs. Lawrence was present. Mabusth explained this Is a two lot subdivision, which alI required standards. She explained the only Issue Is house, which was never granted a conditional use ^® have agreed to file a conditional use permit application to be reviewed at the next Planning Commission meeting. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Jabbour, to adopt Resolution #3148 for Application #1749 James F. Lawrence, ISSO Sixth Avenue North, for preliminary subdivision. Ayes 4, nays 0. ♦ . - • * - •: • • •-. ..• •• '-• • ' *■'*.'*.** ' ‘ ' ‘ •.- '.* • “ ’ ’ !* ... “• ; • • ’ • . • • • * • • ••• ».! -* .•• CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3148_ _ _ _ _ A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A TWO-LOT PLAT LOCATED AT 1550 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH FILE NO. 1749 WHEREAS, James F. Lawrence (hereinafter ”the applicant") on June 24, 1992 filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a two-lot residential plat of property legally described as Lot 4, Block 1, Tanglewood, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter "the property") ? and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 20, 1992 at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on August 10, 1992, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of James F. Lawrence, noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 2 acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. The property contains a total of approximately 6.63 acres with a man-made pond at approximately .25 acre in area. 3. The proposed plat contains 2 lots each exceeding the 2 acre minimum lot area requirement as follows: Lot 1 = 4.42 acres (excluding .25 acres of man-made pond) Lot 2 = 2.13 dry acres 4. Per Stephen Weckman's memo dated July 14, 1992, both sites have been found to have adequate and suitable area for on­ site septic development. Both sites will require mound drainfields. Page 1 of 4 CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3148 5, ^ Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (C) (1), all existing structures on Lot 1 meet the required 100' setback from the protected tributary. The existing septic system on Lot 1 and proposed new septic systems meet the required 75' setback from the protected tributary. 6. Per Section 10.56, Subd. 8 (B) and Subd. 16 (L), all new construction will be subject to the new setback standards for shoreland areas and all areas within 300' of the tributary are subject to the appropriate hardcover controls. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat for James F. Lawrence per the survey dated June 24, 1992, levised July 13, 1992, by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg. Inc., subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant to grant a drainage easement over the pond on Lot 1. 2. Prior to final plat approval, subdivider shall provide written documentation confirming that Lot 2 will be governed by all current”covenants and agreements involving road maintenance and maintenance of other shared improvements for the Tanglewood Plat. 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for new construction on Lot 2, the alternate drainfield site must be staked and protected prior to any land alterations on the property. 4. Access to Lot 1 shall remain via Tract E of RLS #1418 and access to Lot 2 shall be via Tanglewood Road. Future owner of Lot 2 must obtain a permit from the Public Works Director for the installation of a curb cut onto Tanglewood Road. 5. Lot 1 is classified as a through lot. Owner is hereby advised that a conditional use permit is required for the construction of all future accessory structures. Page 2 of 4 GITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3148________ _ _ _ _shall apply for a conditional use permit to permit the continued use of the secondary residence on Lot 1 for guest house use. FINAL PLAT SUBMITTALS The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month: 1. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"=200'. Drawing to include: A. Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg# Inc. dated June 24, 1992, revised July 13, 1992. B. Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10| wide along all perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines. C. Dedication of a drainage easement over the pond area within Lot 1 as shown within plat drawings. 2. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: A. Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. B. The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. C. Signed and executed Drainage Easement document for the drainage easement over the pond within Lot 1 (see sample enclosed). Legal description may read as follows: "shown as the drainage easement within Lot 1, _ _ _plat name_ _, Hennepin County, Minnesota". Page 3 of 4 cin OF omoCITY of OROm ai 01 QEH 375,0( RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCit/ffA 71 375,0i ,,4H irLLEIPT-THM YOU NO. -----£id£------------- f{253660 CCOl ROl 7ii. 09/24 Written docximentation that proposed Lot 2 shall share in the maintenance of road and all other shared improvements within the Tanglewood plat. This should also include Lot 2's share in the ownership of Tanglewood Road. 3.FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $375.00* A. B. *C. Final plat fee = $175.00 Legal review and filing fees of $200.00 Park dedication fee shall be determined by the City Assessor upon approval of the preliminary plat by the Council. The City's Park Commission has reviewed the subdivision and will accept cash in lieu of a dedication of park lands. Applicant will be advised of the park dedication fee amount as soon as the City Assessor has completed his evaluation.m m a m v mm m Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 10th day of Augustr 1992. STATE OP MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) Barbara A. Pierson, FmHCE OFFICE 1JS0200000 01 QER 3064,00 CHECK . TL 3064,00 RECEIFT-THM YOU H255420 cool ROl T14: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on thilA'14/ 10th day of August, 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. notar ^pSu ^- SShhoota I HENNEPIN COUNTY My commission 03^)lrM 6*12-08 ft CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITION/vL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 3 PILE #1758 the owner T^^^prop^ty^iocrted" at the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as. Lot 4, Block 1,. Tanglewood, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"), and WHEREAS, the aoplicant has applied to the City of a conditional Us; Pern.i^ to allow the residential structure on the pioperty for guest hou=,e use per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 3. Minnesota: NOW, THPREPORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1.This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1758. 2.The property is located in the acres. 3.On Auaust 17, 1992 the Oiono Planning Commission reviewed ?he alplLation as proposed and reconm,ended approval based upon the following findinv : a)The guest house use on the property was established in 1967 with the construction of the second residential structure . y^rar^hfstor;^jr47 it*sfru°="hu ‘?; for guest house use purposes. Page 1 of 4 I CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3177 c) The subject property consists of 4.42 acres and therefore meets the 2 acre per one residential unit standard as required by code. d) Stephen Weckman in his report of July 14, 1992 confirms that the existing system has been found to adequately serve the existing house and guest house structure. Additional septic testing submitted has confirmed that there is an alternate site available for future use that would be able to serve both principal structure and guest house. 4. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the continued use of a second residential structure on the property for guest house use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council has considered this application per the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLDSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hvareby grants a Conditional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 3 to permit the continued use of a second residential structure for guest house use on the property located at 1550 Sixth Avenue North, subject to the following conditions: 1. The structure defined as a guest house on the property shall never be used for rental purposes but may be used exclusively for the use of nonpaying guests and employees. Page 2 of 4 I- CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3177_________ 2. 3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned owner has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself» his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono September, 1992. City Council on this 14th day of Ai Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ^Property Owner(s) /'.Ua 7;/a STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of September, 1992, by Barbara A. Peteson & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor 6 City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. NotaryPublic Page 3 of 4 NOTABY^wSu C -MWN^A CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3177 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this 199 X' appeared CL\ V>7.known to me to be the person(s) describedin and whoexecuted the foregoxng instrumentr and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. JAMIE LBOSMA NOwrrpueu&Mi HENNBVI COUNTY My Comm. &piras 1MM7 0NOTA — UBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of within and for4»199jj/ before me County, personally appeared known to me to be the wBiswiiva/ described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. SOk HELEN J. BAHLMANN HENNEPIN COUNTY NOTARY PQBLIC Page 4 of 4 To: From Date: Subject: Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & December 7»1992 "*■ <f O/'#1762 Paul W. Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road - * Qfs Preliminary Subdivision Approval - Resolution Zoning Adm:mis«^^^ c-0 Zoning District: RR-IB (Within Shoreland Overlay District) Application: Split off a building site from existing 4+ acre residence parcel. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Resolution Notice of Planning Commission Action 11/23/92 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/92 City Engineer's Comments Regarding Driveway 11/19/92 Memo and Exhibits of 11/13/92 Summary Mr. Boyke's residence is on a parcel containing 4.7 dry buildable acres. Additionally, the property includes approximately 1.6 acres of wetland bordering Lydiard Lake, such wetland being below the OHW for Lydiard Lake. Applicant's initial proposal to Planning Commission was for two lakeshore lots. However, that configuration required a lot width variance for Lot 1 as measured at both the shoreline and the 150' lakeshore setback. A number of adjacent and nearby neighbors appeared at the Planning Commission public hearing in opposition to the creation of an additional building site on what they consider a "natural wild environment area". The Planning Commission tabled the request, advising the applicant that variances would not be granted. Applicant revised his proposal so that Lot 1 is no longer a lakeshore lot, and therefore the lot width variances no longer are necessary. The new configuration brought forth additional concern about drainage and the driveway construction which have been addressed to staff's satisfaction. Although not specifically addressed by the Pla’’"iing Commission, a minor 250-500' hardcover variance is inherent in the xayout, but this can be effectively mitigated by reducing the allowed 75-250' hardcover by the excess square footage (524 s.f.) in the 250-500' zone, leaving the 75— 250' zone at 24.15% instead of 25%. Each lot has adequate drainfield sites, a reasonably sized building envelope, an accepbble drainage plan and suitable access. Zoning File #1762 December 1, 1992 Page 2 Planning ConoLLssion RecoaoBendation On a vote of 5-1, Planning Commission recommended approval per the conditions listed on page 2 and 3 of the November 13th memo. The minority opinion was that the contrived shape of Lot 1 to contain the minimum required acreager is inappropriate. Staff RecoBBendation Notwithstanding the admittedly contrived shape of Lot 1, this subdivision appears to meet code requirements so as to be considered a legitimate subdivision. All of the new shore land standards are being metr and both lots abut a shared driveway access outlet leading to a private road system which has been upgraded in the last few years» although as a pre-existing roadway it does not meet the standards that would be required of a new private road in the City. Given the above facts, staff recommends approval of the proposed subdivision per the findings and conditions outlined in the attached resolution. A RBSOLDTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR A PLAT AT 793 NORTH FBRNDALB ROAD FILE NO. 1762 NHBREASr Paul W. Boyke (hereinafter "the applicant") on August 28, 1992 filed a formal subdivision application with the City of Orono for approval of a two lot residential plat of property legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Lauranne Woods, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof, except that part of said Lot 1 which lies east of a line drawn north perpendicular to the south line of said Lot 1 from the most westerly corner of Out lot A, Lauranne Woods (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 21, 1992 at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon? and WHEREAS, on September 21, 1992 the Orono Planning Commission tabled the subdivision request of Paul Boyke in order for applicant to revise said proposal to eliminate the need for lot width and average setback variances. The application was revised by the applicant and further reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 16, 1992 at which time the Planning Commission on a vote of 5-1 recommended approval of the preliminary plat? and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on December 14, 1992 the Orono City Council considered the revised subdivision application of Paul Boyke, noting the‘following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 2 acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. Further, the property is located within the Shoreland Overlay District. Page 1 of 7 / 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The property contains a total area of approximately 6.3 acres of which approximately 4,62 acres is considered dry bulldable land. The proposed plat contains two lots each exceeding the 2,0 acre minimum lot area requirement. Both lots are proposed to front on and access to a private driveway outlot to be known as Outlot A» which abuts the privately owned and maintained outlot roadway informally known as Lydiard Road. Proposed Lot 1 abuts proposed Outlot A along Lot I's east line» therefore the defined lot width of nonlakeshore Lot 1 is 310', meeting the 200' minimum requirement. Proposed Lot 2 is considered a lakeshore lot as it abuts Lydiard Lake, and has a defined lot width at the shoreline of 520' and at the 150' setback of 350', therefore meeting the 200' width requirement. It is intended that proposed Outlot A be owned in common by the owners of Lots 1 and 2 and shall be maintained as a private driveway shared by only those two properties. A private cul-de-sac has been dedicated on the plats of Lauranne Woods and Janet Acres and the City has suitable underlying road and utilities easements such that no additional private/public roadway dedication is necessary. Lot 1 is considered to be a nonriparian lot and shall have no legal riparian access to Lydiard Lake via easement or any other method. The granting of such easement would be a direct violation of Municipal Code Section 11.31, Subdivision 4. 9. Lot 2 is considered as riparian to Lydiard Lake. Page 2 of 7 10. The grading and drainage plan submitted by the applicant for construction of a future driveway to serve Lot 2 has been accepted with minor modifications by the City Engineer. The driveway has been designed in detail to eliminate the negative impacts of driveway construction on the property to the south. As a result, existing and future drainage from the applicant's property shall be redirected away from the neighboring property. 11. Both Lots 1 and 2 contain adequate primary and alternate drainfield sites to serve the intended use, and sites on both lots have been adequately protected from drainage concerns. 12. Lot lines have been located so that existing residence and accessory structures on Lot 1 meet required lot line setbacks, and the building envelope within Lot 2 is adequate for development of a single family residence. 13. Lot 2 contains a wetland area located between the OHW and the open water shoreline of Lydiard Lake. A Plowage & Conservation Easement shall be granted with legal description that encompasses said wetland area. 14. While technically a hardcover variance in the 250-500' hardcover zone is required to allow Lot 2's driveway to cover approximately 50% of the 250-500' zone, the need for a hardcover variance can be effectively eliminated by reducing the allowed square footage of hardcover in the 75-250' zone by the square footage of excess hardcover in the 250-500' zone. The area of the 250-500' zone is 1,920 s.f. Proposed driveway is 1,100 s.f. in that zone. Hardcover allowed in the 250-500' zone is 30% or 576 s.f. The excess driveway hardcover is 524 s.f. The area of the 75-250' zone is 61,428 s.f. approximately. The allowable 25% hardcover in the 75-250' zone is 15,357 s.f. Subtracting the 524 s.f. excess hardcover in the 250-500' zone leaves 14,833 s.f. of allowed hardcover in the 75-250', which is 24.15% of that zone. 15. A single family residence can be developed on Lot 2 without the need for further variances. Page 3 of 7 NOWf THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Paul W, Boyke per the survey dated August 28, 1992, revised November 6, 1992 by Coffin and Gronberg, Inc, subject to the following conditions: 1. For Lot 2, to eliminate the need for a hardcover variance in the 250-500' zone, all driveway hardcover square footage in excess of the 30% allowable 250-500' hardcover shall be subtracted from the 25% allowance for the 75-250' zone. This is estimated to reduce the allowable hardcover in the 75-250' zone to approximately 24.15%. 2. Lot 1, containing the existing residence, is considered as a nonlakeshore lot -"id shall have no riparian access to Lydiard Lake via easement or any other method. 3. Lot 2 shall have riparian access to Lydiard Lake and is considered a lakeshore lot. 4. A Flowage & Conservation Easement shall be granted with a legal description that incorporates the wetland areas between the OHW and the open water shoreline of Lydiard Lake. 5. The standard Drainage & Utility Easements shall be granted along the perimeter and interior lot lines, excluding the wetlands area. 6. Lots 1 and 2 shall access via Outlet A to the private road informally known as "Lydiard Road". Prior to filing of the plat, applicant shall satisfy the City Attorney that newly created Lot 2 has legal access via private easements to North Ferndale Road, and shall be subject to whatever private road covenants exist for maintenance of said private road easement. 7. Applicant shall create the private covenants for ownership and maintenance of Outlot A, to be shared by Lots 1 and 2. Further, applicant shall grant to the City a drainage and utility easement over Outlot A, Page 4 of 7 8. Driveway construction for Lot 2 need not be completed until such time that a residence is proposed to be constructed on Lot 2. At that time, driveway construction shall conform to the approved grading/drainage/driveway construction plan on file as modified by the City Engineer. Further, a driveway on Lot 2 shall include a loop or turnaround near the new residence, subject to approval of the building inspector. 9. Suitable driveway easements between Lots 1 and 2 shall be created by the property owner to allow necessary fill for the driveway on Lot 2 to occur at the southeast corner of Lot 1. 10. Any buildings constructed on Lot 2 shall meet the average lakeshore setback as shown on the preliminary plat drawings. 11. Applicant shall pay Vh0 standard park dedication fee. 12. All existing and proposed drainfield sites shall be adequately protected during private driveway construction. FINAL PLAT SUBMITTALS The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month: A. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"=200'. Drawing to include: a) Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Coffin & Gronberg, Inc. dated August 28, 1992, revised November 6, 1992. b) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10' wide along all perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines, such easements to be omitted below the OHW. c) Designation and dedication of a drainage easement within Lot 2 on the plat drawings, the upper boundary of said easement to be concurrent with the OHW contour. Page 5 of 7 B. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: a) Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b) The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c) Signed and executed Conservation & Flowage Easement document for said easement within Lot 2. d) Signed and ex?''uted drainage and utility easement over Outlot A. C. PEES TO BE PAID; Total Due $200.00* a) Legal review and filing fees of $200.00. *b) Park Commission has determined that a park fee will be required. The City Assessor has been asked to determine the fair market of the undeveloped lands within the subdivision so that a park dedication fee can h*i determined. Applicant will be advised as soon as Roil' Erickson, the City Assessor, has submitted his findings. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 14th day of December, 1992. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 6 of 7 ►'r STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN } The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of December, 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 7 of 7 .die CITY OF ORONO P. O. Box €6 Crystal Bay, MN 473-7357 ZONING FILE #1762 55323 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice; 11/23/92 Paul W. Boyke 793 North Ferndale Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES TO: TYT2 OF APPLICATION: Subdivision DATE OP TING: 11/lc 92 VOTE: 5 For 1 Against Planning Comission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: (Per conditions noted in staff memo dated 11/13/92.) Please also note City Engineer's recommendation regarding driveway construction (copy attached). Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday/ December 14, 1992; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m.*i If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning ^ r-mmission. ♦Staff will notify you of meeting location - we hope to be in the new City facilities for the December 14th meeting! JaoDOur expiainea pasi wounciis t e i z ir.a; a reciOf-a» p^rrs pc feasible on Big Island, but it currently is felt that the land should remain residential and the City Council plans to amend the Comprehensive Plan to reflect that attitude. Bellows asked about using a wood foundation in the floodplain. Carlson stated the M.C.W.D. 1s requesting an architecturaI Iy approved foundation. Rowlette stated the loft area Is not a legal bedroom, and added, she has one in her home and it is not used as a bedroom. It was moved by Rowlette, seconded by Johnson, to recommend approve I for Applications #1785, #1781, #1782, #1783 and #1784, for David Carl son, for property involving 600, 610, and 620 Big Island, for a preliminary subdivision. Class II, lot line rearrangement and creation of easement, and variances and conditional use permit, per staff recommendations, and subject to the resolution indicating the loft area can not be used as a bedroom. Ayes 6, nays 0. (#5) #17^2 PAUL W. BOYKE, 793 NORTH FERNDALE ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 9:39 - 9:44 P.M. Paul Boyke and Mark Gronberg were present for this application Gaffron explained the application has been revised to provide only one riparian lot, therefore the standards for measuring the width of the homestead lot have changed. The homestead lot abuts the outlot along its east boundard as required. Another concern was the driveway and the effect it would have on the drainage in the area. He stated the applicant proposes reducing the height of the drive and adding a retaining walI which wiI I actual improve the drainage situation In the area. Gaffron stated the applicant has provided adequate detail so that staff feels comfortable with the proposal. It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Rowlette, to recommend approval of'App1ication #1762 for Paul W. Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road, for preliminary subdivision approval, per staff recommendations. Ayes 5, nays 1. Bellows voted nay as she felt the application is stretching the bounds of futility in the shape of the lots. (#6) #1768 & #1786 DR. WILLIAM R. & RHONDA T. OMLIE, 1860 SHADYWOOD ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING 9:45 - 10:20 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Dr. Willi am and Rhonda Omlie and Ken Larson, I andscape arch Itect, were present. Mabusth explained the 0mlies have filed for a conditional use permit required for the expansion of the paving resulting in approximately 2.7% of additional hardcover. The applicants propose retaining walls and landscape areas underlain w’th geotechnical fabric, increasing the hardcover percentage. She reported the Council approved the side setback variance for expansion of the garage with the condition that hardcover remain at 25.1^. The revised pl.-^ reflects reductions in the deck, patio and paved areas r\r- r\mt la ai-atarl * K o w ha\/o * r- i o rf raH'iCP hardCOVer OO the Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects Otto G B<y^e«roo P6 Bocen W Reverie PE • Jcvepri C Anoer k PE Mjrvin i, So'vaiJ E Tyr^'e^ PE R Ccx:« PE £ \o>ev PE RcC^r: G Scrunicnt PE M EC■ef^•n CPA •5er*o» Convottjnf Hcw^re A P£ Kenh A GevtJon PE Rocen R P^^ne PE ftx^dn: W Pcvrrf PE Djv^d O LcvJujfj P£ Roteft C Ruvvei A i A Jff7 A BouTJon PE Mark A Manicr PE M<nae» T“ Qjurv^rn P£ T«JIC E<id PE Tromav R Aryjervon A t A Dorj-0 C BoogjnJl. P£ Thor'ji £ Anguv PE »vmae« Marmet PE P Rju P£ •Ajres M R ng A i C P Thomas W Pptersoh PE C L.nch PE jj'^'ev R j^J P£ je-r, 0 Pfirvcn P£ Kenneth P Anoffson PE Vjrk R RcifS PE Mark A SeoL PE Gary w Wo^»en PE Dan.r J Eege^n PE Dary' K K.rvc^ermon PE P**<*:p j Cjsv%ri PE vtark D vvaurv pe V ev 3 .f "ven PE L P-' p G'a*e< Iff PE KaT*^ L «men PE Ga'v D Kr.v!<y»t2 PE F "coe *=cv!f' PE •kern R »app PE Srown G Gustafson Cet: <3 C’v er PE Chaf^es A EKiison Leo Pjvsr«sky Haran v Q son James F Engehana November 19, 1992 Mr. Mike Gaffron City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: #1762 Paul Boyke Subdivision File No. 139-1762 pif IT' • Wl w ------- irO 1 :! I it Er* I 'MOV 2 0 lOfe Dear Mike: We have reviewed the plan and profile for the proposed driveway improvements on the Paul Boyke property, located to the east of Lydiard Lake. The plan shows the proposed drive^y which will be constructed of bituminous with a bituminous berm curb on each side. Ihe driveway appears to vary from 8 to 12 feet in width. The driveway alignment is veiy steep and has both a large excavation and fill section. A typical section detail should be provided to show the proposed driveway section, the excavation grades, fill grades and retaining waU. The grddiDg should be 3il (horizontal to vertical) maximuni. The drainage revisions requested by the City staff are appropriate, file proposed swale along the shoreline setback should have a 1 percent minimum slope. The existing 12 cu vert should have rip rap and filter liner at the downstream end. We recommend aprons be placed on all culverts. Drainage easements should be provided along the swale and culvert ahgnment. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. AiUL^y\ Shawn D. Gustafson. P.E. SDG:li l39.cor 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 6I2-636-4600 To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:November 13, 1992 Subject #1762 Paul Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Continuation of Public Hearing List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Revised Survey Exhibit B - Driveway/Grading/Drainage Plans/Topography Exhibit C - Staff Sketch - Outlots/Flag Lot Options Exhibit D - Planning Commission Minutes 10/19/S2 Exhibit E - Memo & Exhibits of 10/16/92 Discussion This item was tabled at your October 19th meeting pending submittal of additional information. All required information has now been submitted. There is one minor revision to lot line locations since the October 16th memo, namely that the narrow "flagpole" driveway corridor for Lot 2 has been flared to better accommodate the driveway. Drainage Concerns Addressed Applicant'b ngineer has completed the necessary topography work and provi< . a grading and drainage plan that addresses staff's concern.,. The driveway serving Lot 2 is actually beneficial to the extent that it redirects drainage westward rather than its existing course southwestward across the alternate drainfield site of the neighbor to the south. Further, the culvert which currently directs drainage towards Lot I's alternate site will be angled and a swale will be developed along the north side of the new driveway to better protect the drainfield sites on Lot 1. In Lot 2, a section of culvert will allow for drainage to be redirected away from the neighboring property to the south and after crossing the driveway will be swaled to the northwest, where it will daylight outside the 0-75' "no grading zone" established by the Shoreland Regulations. Proposed Driveway The flaring of the flagpole for Lot 2 has allowed placement of the new driveway to eliminate any significant filling adjacent to the south lot line. Coupled with a lowering of the existing driveway, the new driveway can be developed within Lot 2, although it is a tight fit. The 2’ retaining wall could be eliminated entirely if the driveway entrance could be shifted further north, however, this would require either an easement over Lot 1 in favor of Lot 2, or creating a wider flare in Lot 2's flagpole which reduces Lot I's current 10' abutment of Outlot A (which abutment is necessary to establish the east line of Lot 1 as its front lot line for lot width measurement purposes). 1 I Zoning File #1762 November 13, 1992 Page 2 Please review Options 1-4, Exhibit C. To be consistent with past approvals, the front lot line is considered the line that abutts the outlot. Option 2 keeps merely a 2' Lot 1/outlot abutment. In working with the applicant and in absence of the Planning Commission's input, staff recommended the currently proposed 10' abutment as being wide enough to accommodate a vehicle while allowing some flaring of the Lot 2 flagpole. Perhaps a more realistic approach would be Option 4 using private driveway easements so that the driveway can be placed further north without jeopardizing Lot I's front lot line status. Emergency Access Standards Wayzata Fire Chief Paul Klapprich visited the project site and indicated that in this situation they will not require any more than the standard driveway width but that a loop or turnaround at the location of the new residence would be appropriate. Klapprich indicated that his equipment is accessible to the "Lydiard Road" neighborhood at its current road width, although he encouraged the City to continue its requirements for wider standardized roads when new subdivisions are created. Staff Recomsiendation Planning Commission is requested to consider the proposed lot line layout as it relates to the driveway, and give staff and applicant direction as to whether one of the alternative options can be used which will yield more driveway design flexibility. The grading/drainage/driveway issues have been addressed to staff's satisfaction. The proposed layout requires no variances to lot area or wicfth standards, and all existing and proposed buildings meet or can meet the appropriate setbacks. The drainfield sites and existing septic system will be suitably protected under the proposed grading and drainage plan. Staff would recommend approval of the proposed subdivision (subject to any riivisions in the flagpole portion of Lot 2 that Planning Commission feels are appropriate) subject to the following conditions; 1.Lot 1, containing the existing residence, will have no riparian access to Lydiard Lake and is considered as a non-lakeshore lot. 2.Lot 2 shall have riparian access to Lydiard Lake and is considered a lakeshore lot. 3.Granting ojI a Flowage and Conservation Easement with description that incorporates the wetland areas between the OHW and the open water shoreline of Lydiard Lake. I Zoning File #1762 November 13, 1992 Page 3 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Isv Granting of standard Drainage and Utility Easements along the perimeter and interior lot lines, excluding the wetlands area. Lots 1 and 2 shall access via Outlet A to the private road informally known as "Lydiard Road". Prior to filing of the plat, applicant shall satisfy the City Attorney that newly created Lot 2 has legal access via private easements to North Ferndale Road, and shall be subject to whatever private road covenants exist before maintenance of said private road easement. Subject to private covenants for ownership and utaintenance of Out lot A, to be shared by Lots 1 and 2. Subject to driveway construction for Lot 2 to conform to approved grading/drainage/driveway construction plan. Further, driveway on Lot 2 shall include a loop or turnaround acceptable to the Building Inspector at the time of residence construction on Lot 2. Subject to driveway easements between Lots 1 and 2. Any buildings constructed on Lot 2 shall meet the average lakeshore setback as shown on the preliminary plat drawings. Subject to Park Dedication Fee (to be determined by City Assessor). All existing and proposed drainfield sites shall be adequately protected during private driveway construction. / ity Easements ties, excluding :o the private d". Prior to :isfy the City ral access via and shall be s exist before »rnership and ots 1 and 2. 2 to conform construction nclude a loop Inspector at2. etween Lots 1 ill meet the i preliminary Btermined by tes shall be B driveway A c > (c I **?*•?••?•*?••••••*•*■ • •••♦♦*. i i i ‘ I i * : : ; • - ; : * : mr : r ihi T : : ; ; ; • i : : •. • i ; ; : ; : : -•••#• . k 4 . ; : : . «■ ‘<j [ { k, i F - k ? f: h V r / pM —T. aj^223l__ *-----------------w.i.:. • ...........k....w —f=.H* I ( k I. p i ??N. vj-' I ■m '■ Hi t * ». * • •• ■ t >.•* i ; • /'• • ; •• *. nrnoh^ W'Oe^ Ne-C^OF L^-r 2. • re /(cco~^c.,«r? Tse/yffio/^y \ 1 o'1/ < \/ « ' . . ■V. . • f . -r-.----- Lot E. ' O^TlOt^S i n f.. * I-.:.- I .*' •S-.i'ifi . ;. * • • I • • .*♦* I • • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD OCTOBER 19, 1992 tf ZONING FILE #1737 - CONT. Rowlette indicated she Is famiIlar with the property and stated she can only remember the screen house being In that area of the property In the 1970s. Hollander stated after the storm, they did not replace any of the boards on the deck but merely put the deck back. He stated his entire lot Is considered non-conforming and Indloated he has spent very much money In the maintenance of same. .Johnson said he appr elates the applicant's situation, but noted thfe-work was done w hout the benefit of permits. He felt to be equItabie wi th other. the applicant should make some concessions. Hollander said he would be willing to concede the screen house to facilitate a vote, but asked that he be granted an extended time period for which to remove the buildings. It was moved by Johi'ison, seconded by Peterson, to recommend approval of Application #1737 for Richard Hollander, 680 North Arm Drive, for after-the-fact variances subject to the removal of the gazebo, 36 s.f. of decking, the plastic landscape areas around the house, the screen house and associated decking by June 1, 1993. Ayes 7, nays 0. (#3) #1762 PAUL W. BOYKE, 793 NORTH FERNDALE ROAD - , _ PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:43 - 7:50 P.M. Paul Boyke was present. Mabusth stated that the application is to be tabled but that staff sought direction from the Commission on the Issue of lot width. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Peterson, to table Appiication #1762 for Paul W. Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road, due to the lack of required Information. Ayes 7, nays 0. Weekman Indicated the additional septic Information raised questions regarding the outlot. He referred to options developed by staff. Cohen said he would prefer to review the options In writing and refused to discuss the application any further. CITY OF ORONO P. O. Box 66 Crys'tal Bay» MN 473-7357 55323 ZONING FILE #1762 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Dare of Notice: 10/26/92 TO: Paul W. Boyka 793 North Ferndale Road Wayzata/ MN 55391 COPIES TO TYPE OP APPLICATION; Subdivision mm mm mm «■» mm mm mm mm mm mb ^m ^m mm ^m ^m ^m ^m mm mm ^m mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm « DATE OF MEETING: 10/19/92 VOTE: 7 For 0 Aqalnst Planning Conmlssion reconmends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant to provide additional information as follows: 1. Complete the topography in the easterly portion ;f Lot 2 and the entire area of Lot 1. 2. Provide a grading/construction plan for the driveway that indicates the extent of filling/cutting necessary and that addresses any concerns which may be forthcomfng from the Wayztfta Fire Chief. 3. Provide a concise and detailed grading/drainage plan to indicate how drainage will be directed to yield no impact on neighboring properties or existing and proposed drainfield sites. No action was taken regirding the various options for lot line layout. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the Nn’^rmber 16, 1992 meeting is Novembe*r 5 th. If desire certified copiss of the offio'^>l Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Rec. rder after review andill ^ il U W w ^ w * 4 w j C4 JL w G4 w Ca JL JL. O Um w <*• w approval by the Planning Commission. Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator October 16, 1992 Subject #1762 Paul Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Continuation of Public Hearing List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Revised Survey Septic Plans/Diagrams, Lots 1 and 2. Notice of Planning Cr,.^mission A'^tion 9/24/92 Planning Commission Minutes 9/21/92 Uniform Fire Code Excerpt Additional Exhibits from September Meeting Memo & Exhibits of 9/18/92 Discussion Applicant ’s surveyor has provided a proposed lot line schematic that appears to eliminate the need for any lot area, lot v/idth, or structural setback variances. However, •'he septic testing information, whirl- was not received until nursday, October 15, cou-j.-led with tne proposed driveway for Lc 2, raises as many questio.'.s as it resolves. Lot Standards Applicant is proposing that Lot 1 not be a lakeshore lot, and has redrawn the lot lines at the west end so that no portion of Lot 1 intersects the shoreline. As a non-lakeshore lot. Lot I's defined width is measured at the front lot line (the lot line _ A _ . m ^ m h m __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _that abutts Out lot A, to be consistent with past City approvals of similar situations) and at the 50' front setback. The east line of Lot 1 therefore becomes the front lot line, and at that line as well as the 50' setback, lot width is 315', meeting the minimum 200' width requirement. Lot 2 becomes a lakeshore lot, and by definition its width is measured at the shoreline and at the 150' setback using the defined straight-line measurement. Lot 2 has a width at the shoreline of 520' and at the 150' setback of 350', therefore meeting the width requirements. Note that because this is a lakeshore lot, there is no standard for lot width at the street lot line or its setback. Driveway/Standards As noted in the September 18 memo, the proposed driveway for Lot 2 is an extension of the existing driveway for Let 1, and as proposed in the current plan is approximately 500' in length past the existing driveway. A review of the Uniform Fire Code indicates as follows: 1 Zoning File #1762 October 16, 1992 Page 2 Section 10.207.A - Required construction. Every building hereafter constructed shall be accessible to Fire Department apparatus by way of access roadways with all-weather driving surface of not less than 20' of unobstructed width, with adequate roadway turning radius capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and having a minimum of 13' 6” of vertical clearance. Dead end Fire Department access roads in excess of 150' long shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of Fire Department apparatus. Additional provisions of that code (see Exhibit E) modify this to some extent at the approval of the Fire Chief. Staff will be contacting the Wayzata Fire Chief and will be discussing the access issue with him to determine what standards may be appropriate. Septic/Driveway Conflicts Of additional concern is the proximity of the proposed driveway to a portion of the existing drainfield system for Lot 1, as well as a corner of the alternate site for Lot 2. Lot 2 has primary and alternate sites tested which meet all requirements except that one small corner of the alternate site may end up within 10' of the proposed driveway depending on its width and actual location. The grade is relatively level at this location and only a small fraction of the alternate site would ultimately be affected. This is a septic code variance which staff would have no problem approving. The existing drainfield is not failing and according io the test information provided when it was installed in 3 987, it is considered as a conforming system. However, the end of the last trench will be 10' from the proposed lot line at the neck of Lot 2. Again this is not an issue except that staff questions whether the driveway can be developed within its 15' corridor at this location. Driveway Development No grading plan for the driveway has been submitted. However, it is clear that where the new driveway extends westward from the existing blacktop, the immediate drop in elevation will require a significant width of fill to accomodate the 9' wide driveway proposed, even more if additional width is needed for f-;re access purposes. Working on the premise that we won't allow driveway grading to occur within 5' of the south lot line of the subdivision, how wide should the neck of Lot 2 become in order to accomodate its driveway? If it needs to be 30' or more in width at the east boundary where it abutts Outlot A, then Lot 1 would no longer abut Outlot A, which would require a variance. As an alternative, if Outlot A was extended, the question then becomes, which boundary of Lot 3 is its front lot line, and does the defined width meet the 200' requirement? Zoning File §1762 October 16, 1992 Page 3 A final issue which the submittals do not adequately address is how drai. - ge wi 11 be revised from the existing driveway and from the culvert that drains the property to the east, given that these flows will now be constricted between the driveway and the existing drainfield. Staff Recommendation The combination of zoning standards, shoreland regulations, stptic code requirements and fire access regulations have such an impact on development of this property that the City is forced (and obligated) to require a great deal of site planning that normally is not necessary at the subdivision stage. The late submission of septic information has not allowed staff to grasp the "big picture" until the very last minute, therefore staff would suggest that this item be tabled once again so that the applicant can provide the following information which now appears necessary to thoroughly evaluate this proposal: 1. Complete the topography in the easterly portion of Lot 2 and the entire area of Lot 1. 2. Provide a gradim/construction plan for the driveway that indicates tha extent of fi^ling/cutting necessary and that addresses any concerns which may be forthcoming from the Wayzata Fire Chief. 3. Provide a concise and detailed grading/drainage plan to indicate how drainage will be directed to yield no impact on neighboring properties or existing and proposed drainfield sites. Planning Commission is further requested to consi*^?y the proposed lot line layout at this time, and give api» ^icant direction as to how much actual frontage on Outlot A is necesi,ary for Lot 1 in order that its east line be considered as the front lot line. Isv tely address riveway and given that 5way and the regulations, lave such an y is forced anning that The late ff to grasp efore staff so that the now appears tion of Lot le driveway 3 necessary :h may be age plan to a yield no Lsting and nsidsji; the apt) iicant 5 necesjary the front Xmzzm T> z oocz H < . 2 Z ' rnCO ,1 o “T1 § 7^ 5c 33 > Zzm $ooa CO CD O •< 7sm I 094 •» 3 sn 4 I C •9 •• •• x?!7 • to M M 3 rt /♦ (A 9 3 f»«0«0to to n r* to to 3 < < ft to to o*— rt c H *1 O 3 / / Xs •oz ooczH < Z Zm (A § o•n § r* C 3} >ZZm 8 Uv» 5 C 0)o < m V %...... 6m.-n^-»m ATfWnC *>»< «4 <? . tfXtV<IUL> **■?? TnMV.% ./-si' ^.v'‘\^\\5L\Wp‘v\ \\V\ ^ '\ I 'f\ V V ^ ■tA \> <».jj tx)-^ a. .... ttocv- • • Vlo<t •. 'Te^^v'i-W -<o iwt. ujevc ib 10* f<0 01 t.||.»0 ; ^-^-W cx>\^ V kTAv »^»oP M.-r-r *y; tO\x:»r: -%vvvi«.vx»*s•^0-1 utu. r-r S S’u'uoHU Ci/i wfi T i I -T'^M fn0 Qf —tl^x^IOO.a scAii : /**« 5'P* XSoil BorinQS ^ Bench Mof k S rii:coLATiOAj rrsr Note: T>ii$ sjrsteni is lo be constructed to meet Ihe kCnncsolo PoUuton Control Agency Chapter 7080 i Local Ordinance Note : Check all underground utilities KlCAALL*MiA¥l£SUl0HmrOff 9A Tpti T*tArf4i ^‘T Aft AS iflfAff AHO AfTM^ Cot4STAUCrtOAt . - /ri.fl - 4n -3 • : .••!<' V-1?i>vbO^ /o-l' -^A. Pf«P£RTY nf» f-^UL. SoVK I LOT! BtOCte! £.AuRAUH£ tiJoaOi SASTyt, ( UO-r 1 *) aA^f/o HaI. hbmn. e.o. S-F TESTING !NC.^ Designed flyt 6b . ^bOk^ DoffiL/±/a, PH.62-497-3566 MiWi- ..0“ ■->**■ CITY OP ORONO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 473-7357 ZONING FILE #1762 55323 NOTICE OP PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: 9/24/92 TO: Paul W. Boyke 793 North Ferndale Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES TO: TYPE OP APPLICATION: Subdivision DATE OP MEETING: 9/21/92 VOTE 7 For 0 Against Planning Connnission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AMD SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Polling of the Planning Commission indicated lakeshore lot width variance was not likely to be granted. Application was tabled pending: 1. Submission of revised proposal requiring no variances. 2. Submission of septic testing information. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the October 19, 1992 meeting is October 9th. If the applicant has trouble obtaining additional information, please contact the Zoning Department (473-7357). If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Planning Commission Chair Charlie Kelley, Maureen Bellows, Charles Schroeder, Stephen Peterson, Ed Cohen, Candace Rowlette, and Jeff Johnson. The following represented the City Staff; Assistant P|->nning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron and City Recorder Teri Naab. Mayor Peterson, Ed Cal Iahan and Gabriel Jabbour were present to represent the Council. Chair Kelley called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. OM) #1762 PAUL W. BOYKE, 793 NORTH FERNDALE ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 - 7:15 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mai ling were noted. Paul Boyke was present. Gaffron explained that staff has not received septic testing for the lots and the applicfint wishes to w£ . t to submit such until after the meeting tonl^iht. He referred to two additional letters received from neighbors, the Bergs and Higgins (Exhibit A). He explained the property is near Lydiard Lake. Previous subdivisions In the area have provided fcr land acquisition for a future cul- de-sac. Lot 1, with the existing house, has 2.12 acres of dry buildable land, and .25 acres wetland. Lot 2 has 2.57 acres dry and 1.36 acres wetland. The unique configuration proposed is due to the setback requirements, the need for 2 acres of dry buildable land, and the need for septic sites on the property. Lot 1 has 165’ of lakeshore where 200’ is required, therefore a variance Is needed, and Lot 2 has 3*t0’ of lakeshore. Chair Kelley stated the subdivision is in a 2 acre zoning district and this proposal does not meet the standards of that district. He stated he is not in favor of the proposal. Peterson agreed with Chair Kelley and added the additional hardcover for the driveway wi!I also be a factor. All the members agreed with Chair Kel’ey. Johnson asked to hear any pubiic comments. J im and Debbie Higgins, 259 Hollander Road, stated their cpposition to the proposal, citing the preservation of wildlife in the a.> ea and privacy as reasons for their opposition. I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 ZONING FILE #1762 - CONT. Chair Kelley reminded them that Boyke has enough acreage, but It Is the need for variances that he is opposing. Paul Bruer, 275 Hollander Road, said he Is concerned with the proximity of the proposed residence to the lake. Jim and Judith Hunder, 255 Hollander Road, agreed with their neighbors’ opposing remarks. Mrs. Hunder noted the Issue of the need for variances and felt the subdivision did not make sense. Boyke explained he first proposed this subdivision prior to the new shoreland regulations, but was made to wait due He noted the "point" area of the property is unbuildable due to current regulations. He is hoping to protect their views J^e lake and also realize the full value of his they do not have a desire for a dock or pier out ^^® ' ®^® * indicated he would be willing to divide off a second making it a lakeshore lot. He added, their intent is not to change the wildlife of the area. Johnson asked about t:*e strip of property near the cul-de-sac, the ownership of which is in question. Boyke explained that the City approved a metes and Po^^^ds division, but it was not recorded at the County correctly. He is in the process of trying to work that issue out. Chair Kelley felt that septic testing for the site may determine where the property boundaries should be placed. It was moved by Chair Kelley, seconded Py ^'® ■ Application #1762 Paul W. Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road, pending septic test information. Ayes 7, nays 0. (#2) #1764 AUSTIN EVANS, 255 LANDMARK DRIVE - , „ , cn d wPRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - PUBLIC HEARING 7:42 - 7:50 P.M. The Aff idavi t of Publication and Certi f i cate of Mailing were no-^ed. Austin Evans was present. s.rr..* 10.206-10.208 Jirtii^f IUNIFOHM FIRE CODEObstruction ol Fire Protection EquipmentSec.'10.206. No person shall place or keep any post, fence, vehicle, giowih, (rash.'kloragc or other material or thing near any fire hydrant, fire dcpartmenl connection or fire protection system control valve that would prevent such equipment or hydrant from being immediately discernible or in any other manner Of hinder the lire department from gaining immediate u'cess to said gqtiipni5fiT7irKYdcaAt_/^fninirmim 3-foot clear space shall be niaircaincd around thr;.ircumfcrencc of the rir#» Access Roadways for Fire Apparatus Sec. 10.207. (a) Required Construction. Every building hereafter con­ structed shall be accessible to Tire department apparatus by way of access road­ ways with all-^^’cathcr driving surface of not less than 20 feet of unobstructed width, with adequate roadway turning radius capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and having a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance. Dead-end Fire department ac'^tss roads in excess of ISO feet long shall be provided with approved provisions r the turning aiound of fire department apparatus. EXCEPTION: When there arc not more than two Group R, Division 3 or M Occupancies as denned in the Building Code, the requirement of this section may be modified when, in the opinion of the chief, fiie-fighting or rescue operations would not be impaired. (b) Obstructing. The required width of access roadM«iys shall not be obstructed in any manner, including parking of vehicles. NO PARKING signs or other appropriate noticc.or both,prohibiting obstructions may be required and shall be maintained. (c) Extent. The access roadway shall be extended to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of any building. Where the access roadway cannot be provided, approved fire protection system or systems shall be provided as required and approved by the chief. (d) Firc-protectioii Alternate. Wlicrc firc-proicciion systems approved by the chief are provided, the above required clearance may be modified. (c) Ovtrsizing. The chief shall have the authority fo require an increase in the minimum access widths where such width is not adequate for fire or rescue operations. (0 Bridges. Where a bridge is required to be used as access under this section, it shall be constructed and maintained n accordance with the applicable sections of the Building Code and using design live loading suff'^i*- to carry the imposed loads of the fire apparatus. cid. Prernises Identificotlon See. 10.208. Approved numbcte or addresses shall be placed on all new and nistifli; l^yiljjngs in such a positirn a:. *o be p'au..y visible and legible from the \trrri nr rmti frnnliriy .■.gfStlia)l>LqntraSt with tlicir background. * 5 Li n •c- %-s* te M* a « m• ^ .•4;. •4 • 1982 EDITION 10.209-10.301Key BoxSee. 10.209. When access to or within a structure or an area is unduly difficult, because of secured openings ur where immediate access is necessary for life­saving or firc-fighting purposes, the chief may require a key box to be insla: tin an accessible location. 'Hie key box shall be a type approved by ilic chief and shall contain keys to gain necessary access as required by the chief. Division III INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF FIRE- PROTECTION, LIFE-SAFETY SYSTEMS AND APPLIANCES Installation See 10.301. (a)'I^'pc Required. T1ic chief shall designate the type and number of fire appliances (0 be installed and maintained in and upon all buildings and premises in the jurisdiction other than private dwellings, lliis shall be done according to the relative severity of probable fire, including the rapidity with which it may spread. Such appliances shall be of a type suitable for the probable class of fire associated with such building or premises and shall have approval of the chief Porlabiv. fire extinguishers shall be in accordance with U.F.C. Standard No. 10-1. (b) Special Hazards. In occupancies of an especially haz:« ous nature or wheru special hazards exist in addition %o the normal hazard of the ccupancy, or where access for fire apparatus is unduly difficult, additional s .guards may be required consisting of additional fire appliance units, more than one type of appliance, or S{)ccial systems suitable for the protection of the hazard involved. Such devices or appliances may consist of automatic fire alarm systems, automat­ ic sprinkler or wa?cr spray systems, standpipe and hose, fixed or portable fire extinguishers, suiiable asbestos blankets, breathing apparatus, manual or auto­ matic covers, carbon dioxide, foam, halogenatcd and dry chemical or other special fire-extinguishing systems. Where such systems aire installed, they shall be in accordance with the applicable Uniform Fire Code Standards or standards of the N.iiional Fire Protection Association when Unifomi rirc Code Standards do not apply. (c) Water Sup|)Iy.\An approVi*d‘water su capable of supplying required • fire flow for fire protection shall be provided to all premises upon which buildings* or portions of buildings arc hereafter constructed; Wlicn any portion of the building protected is in excess of 150 feel from a water supply on a public street, ihtr^f shall be provided, when required by the chief, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow. Watc' supply may consist of rcsei>c.:s, pressure tanks, elevated tanks, water mains or ether fixed system capable of supplying the required fire flow. In setting the rcquircr.icnts for fire flow, the chief may be guided by (he standard published .* 1 1 III •• • I «.t I IL». m L t . t ) • •• 3 I ! ^ e- - : . WBKm if i Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik& Associates Engineers & Architects Ono O Bon«i:rDO PE ffooert W toicne. PE' Joifori C An<jeft*iL P£ Margin c Sorvaia P£ «<njfd £ Turner PE Genn R Cook. P£ Thomai £ Ncyn PE 0oO«n G SchtirHChL P£ Suun M £bert*n. C PA •S^nof Conjuixant Mc?warcJ A Sanforc PE A Gc'OOn P£ Rcserr R Pfe.Ter-. P£ Richard W Foster. PE Oavid O Loskota. PE Booert C Russek. AiA Jfffy A BouftiOn. PE Mam A Hanson. PE. Mchaei T. Rautmann. PE Ted ic Field. PE Thomas R. Anoerson. A l.A Donald C Surgara. PE Thomas E Angus PE Gary F ffyiander P£ :*maei Maninez PE Vx.-arf P Rau. P£ Acres M Ring. AJ C.P Thomas W Peterson. P£ M<naei C Lynch PE Jarnes R Maiand. PE Jerry O. Penach. P£. PCerweth P. Arsdenofi PE Mam R Roft. PS. Mar« A Se<x PE. Ga/y W Monea PE Dar^ J Edgenon, PE. Phiiio J Cas'Aie*. PE Marfc D Waiiii PE SLjes a Jensea PS L Phiiiio Gravel Ui. PE Karen L Wiemen. PE F, Todd Fosief. PE. Keth R vappi PE Shawn O. Gustafsoa PE. Ceofao Oihnef. PE Charles A ErKkson Leo M. PawefsKy Harlan M Gson James F Engema/ot September 17, 1992 Mr. Mike Gaffron City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Ciystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: #1762 Paul Boyke Subdivision FUe No. 139-1762 Dear Mike: We have reviewed the proposed subdivision of Lot 1, Block 1, Lauranne Woods Addition on the Paul Boyke proiXfty, located to the east of Lydiard Lake. Subsequent to our site inspection, there are several engineering issues that should be noted. Lydiard Lake is a DNR protected water, identified as Basin No. 27-159P. Tlie accepted ordinary high water elevation (OHWL) of the lake is 970.9. For setback purposes this elevation contour should be considered the shoreline of Lydiard Lake. The City’s municipal code requires certain setbacks to shorelines and these have been shown appropriately on the site plan. The code also requires a 200 foot shoreline for each lot to have lake access. If Lot 1 is planned to have lake access, the westerly lot line of Lot 2 should be realigned to provide 25 feet of additional shoreline to Lot 1. If Lot 1 is indeed planned to have lake access by means of the 10 foot wide strip of land along the north property line, a grading plan should be provided to show any planned improvements in that area. We understand that the bituminous access road from North Femdale Road is a private drive which is platted as an outlot with joint resident ownership. To eliminate an undesirable flag lot with driveway easements, we recommend that the 30’ by 407 ’ "flag pole" also be platted as an outlot with joint ownership by both lots. This v'ould be in accordance with the code requirements for a minimum lot footage of 200 feet. Drainage and utility easements should be provided five feet wide along both sides of the proposed lot division line. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERUK & ASSOCIATES, INC Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. SDG:lk 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 • > I • •• • «*•«f) ..Q-OO.i/^ C*/^cL nci , Co 'Or^r*^ jS^S’/iv^ *SEP 2 1 1992 - e^a ___Subdi.uidiDo Qzl Jt ^Sc>^\^ __V^e^..CUe^ UDo'^iocf 7r\ pn> (Jn4brTU/'i^4<i “it? bt,-ffvey\i^ “j^‘<S iS^^sLAiv-'^. hc<2/0«-' /OOSed____' c ^e, CcboiH- 'rAd/ri"iDP.e ci <pn:pe,^“^ T^ ^Du..-/^ c_Syclc t)uA* UL)\&U“it) '€j^CouT<2jc^ COnSud' 'i <^Cc^ iD^rJc) .‘So _-TA2. d/6tmOAO:^Cl>^<2^. nror. .... d^ct I f^a NDr-H>> ^‘6i S'i ,yH.CjodK 0-V *S-<2p ic-_aoA.. S'^Cji^ (>K«cA fu./~i Cc-On^ Clv " ^'Dp2J2jJu (io "ii^4 “ J ^ J V. prYlc p/X2D2£:^ . r^Ui(eA.3p „ ^rh. <2^»ck.. PfDoeAi 1&r ^.. -HW:. 0-0-i4<=^ oli. pr0'ly:ih)[ii'"<j <h^.'hxj-(f^.,. ^,... d bo .tvo4:.. L^/d" *4d be. Gop'>p(‘;^-^:J=i- CjooT'fezx^ 6iA«L 4^' 'bcxd . K^uao te.cil jr> duxr..<^^: rfy^ 0.0b CHp.“^ rer«i d^icWd* -}^ CxA-cL,'' if^£gciacl \jJr\ic\^. tOo ~b> h PrP PlLV' Hod".. Ui.. lTO;r4"Q ‘i(^ "Iv. <2m;^ .. CcQr^ tH\o es-^bO S ka p:#3'■•So^ C»^6^-ck-:..S<2e . ^£. "HYb-b LPm. 4d ^ a^bo.Vo, Uidt? UbiCj^ Cu^ GOASid^cdloaS ' I CiAci od-Vk^ Sgla ^L “Khv ^- <2-><pr«i.is Conftckpo^ Pr^ db. ACt/^ b <0_ »hi f^f~ . . I Mr. Michael Gaffron Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Orono, Minnesota CITY 0= ORONC SEP 2 1 '1S92' September \7. 1992 Re: Proposal J»1762 - Paul W. Boyke Subdivision Dear Mr. Gaffron; My husband «Jim and I are concerned about Paul W. Boyke's proposed subdivision. We have lived at 259 Hollander Road for two and a half years and our property borders Mr. Boyke's lot. Our property and Mr. Boyke's are beautiful examples of the natural wild environment areas that Orono has worked hard to preserve and protect. Lydiard Lake and its surrounding wetlands, located in the proposed subdivision area, is home to many types of birds, wildlife, trees, and plantlife which my family and I enjoy observing and protecting. One concei*n we have about Proposal ^1762 is that the proposed subdivision is quite close in proximity to Lydiard Lake and its surrounding wetland area. Does the City of Orono consider this proximity appropriate in meeting the standards set forth in the Shoreland Management Ordinance document? Will the subdivision proximity be appropriate in preserving this natural wetland/lake area and protecting it from decay? The building site, as proposed, appears to be placed on a sloping area of land or bluff with the house sitting below land on three sides. What effect wiU drainage or land erosion, resulting from removal of large mature trees from the building site, have on Lydiard Lake? What effect will a sewer/septic system, placed on a bluff impact area, have on the wetland area below, especially considering storm water runoff? r We feel that the proposed new construction will have a negative impact on this beautiful natural shoreland area and that the proposed subdivision is not appropriate for the Lydiard Lake area. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, vJames C. Higgins 259 Hollander Road Orono, Minnesota Higgins ■ { 4 To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator September 18, 1992 Subject: #1762 Paul W. Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB, Single family rural residential, 2 acres Application: Request to create an additional 2 acre residential lot from existing residence parcel. Note: As of this date applicant has not provided septic testing information. Staff has been advised that testing has not been commenced. Staff will request tabling of this application for review of septic information once it is submitted. However, this is a public hearing and has generated significant neighbor interest. Planning Commission should treat th'fi as a sketch plan review, hear from the public and advise applicant of any potential problems with the proposal. List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey Letter from Neighbors at 265 Hollander Road Letter from Neighbors at 275 Hollander Road Facts and Dimensions * = Variance Reqd. I.Lot Area (Dry Contiguous) Lot 1(Existing House) 2.12 Ac. Lot 2 2.57 Ac. Required 2.0 Ac. (Wetland Below OHW)0.25 Ac.1.36 Ac.— (Total 2.37 Ac.TT9I Ac.2.0 Ac.•HHLot Width - At Shoreline (OHW)165' *342' +200’ - At 150' Setback 12' *350' +200' III.Setbacks Structures to OHW 350' +150' +150'Min. Septic to OHW 290' +(150'+)150'Min. L. Side Setback (S)135'210'30' R. Side Setback (N)45'30'30' Rear Setback (E)54*52' 50' Driveway/HC to OHW 390'85'75' Septic to Lot Lines 20'20'20’ Zoning File #1762 September 18» 1992 Page 2 IV. Abuts Public or Private Road V. Hardcover 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' Lot 1 NO * Lot 2 Yes Required Yes 0% 0% 20% As Proposed 0% +20% As Proposed 40%+ 0% 25% 30% Sumnary Applicant proposes to split off a 2 acre building site from his existing residence parcel containing 4.69 acres of dry buildable land above the 970.9 ordinary high water level of Lydiard Lake. Issues for Consideration 1. The surveyor has defined two potential drainfield sites, each 40'x90' in area meeting the required setbacks from the proposed lot lines and house, and the 150' lakeshore setback. It remains to be seen whether testing will confirm the adequacy of these sites. The system serving the existing residence was inspected on September 3rd and found to be in compliance. The alternate site for the existing residence has yet to be reviewed. 2. Lot width. Because both lots are proposed as lakeshore lots on Lydiard lake, the lot width is measured ^ the shoreline and at the 150' setback, measured as a straight line between points at which the side lot lines meet the ordinary high water elevation, and similarly at the 150' setback. Lot 1 does not meet the 200' width standard at either of these locations, and in fact even if the proposed division line was moved eastward to increase Lot I's shoreline width to 200', the 200* requirement at the 150' setback line could never be met. This begs the question as to whether a lot width variance will be granted for this lot configuration (which was obviously contrived to give the existing house lakeshore access as well as necessary dry buildable area). Note that east of the 10' corridor. Lot 1 contains approximately 1.5 acres. 3. As it currently appears on the plat map, Boyke does not own the 30'xl63.78' strip adjacent to his driveway, and until he does own this, the proposed subdivision would leave Lot 1 not abutting a public cr private roadway. If he a ^'quires this strip, then both Lots 1 and 2 will legally abut Outlot A (private road) or the adjacent parcel considered by Hennepin County as dedicated City right-of-way. If he does not acquire the strip, the 30' corridor of Lot 2 should be platted as an outlot. Zoning File #1762 September 18, 1992 Page 3 4. Because both lots are proposed as lakeshore lots, there is no lot width requirement at the road and therefore the flag lot nature of the proposal would not technically require a lot width variance. In similar circumstances with a non-1akeshore lot, the City has consistently required that the narrow driveway corridor from a flag lot be platted as an outlot to avoid a lot width variance. 5. It should be noted that the City currently has a drainage easement (Conservation and Flowage Easement) extending landward to the survey line shown on the proposed subdivision. The surveyor is apparently proposing a new drainage easement merely over the wetland, which suggests a revision to the existing C & F Easement description. Staff would note that quite often for the surveyor's convenience, drainage easements are plotted by metes and bounds description which does not necessarily follow the edge of the wetland, and setbacks are measured from the wetland not from the easement. Similarly, the dry land between the edge of the wetland and the easement boundary is considered as dry buildable land. 6. Under the current configuration, the new residence technically requires an average lakeshore setback variance. Because average setback as a matter of policy is defined by a line between the adjacent residence structures on either side of the subject property, the average setback for Lot 2 would be a line drawn between the house on Lot 1 and the residence to the south which is even further east than the existing house on Lot 1. Further, if Lot 1 was not c. lakeshore lot and the northwesterly boundary of Lot 2 was at the northwest boundary of the property, the next adjacent lakeshore residence would be 445 Spring Hill Road and the average setback for Lot 2 would be barely lakeward of the proposed house. 7. Because there is no full cul-de-sac within 1,000* of the house, the driveway serving Lot 2 should be looped or adequate turnaround provided for emergency vehicles. Additional Factors/Requireaents of Approval 1. The Park Commission has requested a park dedication fee in lieu of land for this subdivision. 2. If the driveway becomes a shared outlot, its ownership must be shared. If not, appropriate easements must be granted. Staff Reconendation Please advise applicant whether the noted lot width, average setback and 250-500' hardcover variances are acceptable. The application should be tabled until septic data is submitted and reviewed. I J .LCITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION i^PLl€«BQ!&N H- - -irPROPERTY LOCATION n B 9,Site Address, /'ZS /J^ je^)Ak_ _ _ _ _ _ _------------------cm QF cam Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) /3 FI n/^HCE OFFICE l'S502Q0000 Please check one - Property _ _ abstract or torrens? Oi QEH 325.0. uHECK TL 325 m 0\ Attach legal description to application. RECEIFT-Tt^iK Y(A ------------------------------------------------------------------- Phone (home ) ^13- 7^ 00/23.APPLICANT Name P/^uL CU- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (work) 3¥^-93l\ / - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -^- - - - - Address; 7^ a /, City; ^/cy/iV Z/i7A Zip; / ONNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Ncune Phone (work) Address; _____________________ (attach list if more than one) City;Zip; EXISTING LAND USB Number of Tax Parcels / Development Size y.o £J^Q Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check)Residential; no. of units Other (specify)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ / Present Zoning District /S PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes >< Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites;/ / Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density; Minimxim Lot Size: Units per ^.30 Acres ^7, /Zg Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use; (check)X Residential Other (specify) .AdBDflBfeLba. T 2. 3. fONIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). As an addendum to this application^ please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 4. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. Title opinion. Easements, Covenants, etc. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $200.00 300.00 Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision)300.00 Preliminary Review (Class III S all non-resldential)325.00 + 25.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) *(Plus any legal or engineering charges) 175.00 Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application 150.00 Renewal of Final Subdivision Application 100.00 The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional feesestablished by ordinance. Applicant's Signature (Hmer's Signature - Date Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. Zf an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 08/21/92 HEMIEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0»#4ERS LISTBATCH 005PROP ADOR OltfER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR % PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP ADOR CM€R NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR t PROP ADOR CMIER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 38 25-118-23 34 0003 00445 SPRING HILL RO R J NIGQN I M E NIGON RICHARD J I MARY E NIGON 445 SPRING HILL RD NAYZATA MN 55391 38 25-118-23 43 0014 00315 HOLLANDER RD TIP HARBERTS THOMAS I PATRICIA HARBERTS 315 HOLLANDER RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 25-118-23 43 0024 00325 HOLLANDER RD J I C GOLINVAUX JEROME I CHARLOTTE GOLINVAUX 325 HOLLANDER RO HAYZATA m 55391 38 36-118-23 11 0010 00645 FERNOALE RD N RICHARD E STRAND ETAL RICHARD E I JOAN M STRAND 645 NO FERNOALE RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 11 0020 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED P N BOYKE I V L BOYKE PAUL N BOYKE 795 NO FERNOALE DR HAYZATA m 55391 PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 38 36-118-23 12 0007 00745 FERNOALE RD N JOHN A BERG I NANCY C BERG JOHN A I NANCY C BERG 745 FERNOALE RD N ORONO MN 55391 38 25-118-23 43 000400038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEDJ I C GOLINVAUXJEROME I CHARLOTTE GOLINVAUX325 HOLLANDER RDNAYZATA MN 55391 38 25-118-23 43 0016 00265 HOLLANDER RD J H HUNDER I J A HUNDER JA. es H I JUDITH A HUNDER 265 HOLLANDER RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 25-118-23 43 0025 00275 HOLLANDER RD P F ENUER I L J MILLER PAUL F BRUER LINDA J HILLER 275 HOLLANDER RD NAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 11 0012 00765 FERNOALE RO N ALLEGRA H PARKER PAUL L I ALLEGRA N PARKER 765 FERNOALE RD N HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 12 0001 00036 address UNASSIGTSD J I C GOLINVAUX J I C GOLINVAUX 325 HOLLANDER RD NAYZATA MN 5S391 38 36-118-23 12 0008 00735 FERNOALE RD N MARGARET 0 PITTMAN ET AL E E I MARGARET 0 STRICKLAM 735 FERrmALE RD N HAYZATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 1438 25-116-23 43 001300260 HOLLANDER RD L I 0 GILPIN LARRY I DARYL GILPIN 260 HOLLANDER ROAD HAYZATA m 55391 38 25-118-23 43 0017 00259 HOLLANDER RO J C HIGGINS I D C HIGGINS PHH US MORTGAGE CORP 55 HAOOONFIELD RD CHERRY HILL NJ 08002 38 25-118-23 43 OCIj 00235 HOLLANDER RD K M MARINE I K I MARINE KONRAD M I KAY I MARINE 235 HOLLANDER RD HAYZATA MN 55391 I 38 36-118-23 11 0017 00715 FERNOALE RO N RICHARD J LYMAN RICHARD J LYMAN 715 NO FERNOALE RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 12 0002 00725 FERNOALE VC N R I R MACLEOD RONALD C MACLEOD 725 N FERNOALE RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 12 0009 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED JOHN A BERG I NANCY C BERG JOHN A t NANCY C BERG 745 FERNOALE RO N ORONO MN 55391 i 4 .! _ _ _ _ __ ^ RUN DATE OS/2I/T2 HEFtCPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY O^RS LIST REPORT NO. PI43540I PAGE 15BATCH 005PROP ADDR (RtCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 36-118-23 12 0013 OOm FERNOALE RD N PAUL H A VIRGINIA L PAUL N A VI^<GIN1A L 793 FERNDALE RD N HAYZATA MN 55391 BOYKEBC 38 36-116-23 12 001600795 FERNDALE RO N 0 R A D J FLATZ J0U6LAS R A DIANE J FLATZ 795 FERNDALE RD N NAYZATA m 55391 38 36-118-23 12 001500038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED PAUL N A VIRGINIA BOYKE CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 PROP ADDR CMKR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 38 36-118-23 22 0003 00755 LONG LAKE RD E r NINSTON A E C NINSTON FREDERICK NINSTON 755 SPRING HILL RD NAYZATA til 55391 TOTAL BATCH 005 00022 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEftlEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF DATl ‘;ir -tMTk t«i 3 • ‘-w * c;r/c- September 11^ 1992 -i u w*.v • J \> LiJ L:i rorKi O f /:> 1 Mr. Mike Gaffron Asst. Planning and Zoning Admin. Village of Orono Orono, MN SEP 14 ass Re; #1762 - Paul W. Boyke Subdivision Dear Mr. Gaffron: We are neighbors of Paul Boyke's living at 265 Hollander Rd. When we purchased our house, our understanoxng was that the lot behind us was long and narrow with a house on the street, but otherwise unbuildable. We considered the lot Mr. Boyke bought to be one of the most beautiful lots in the Orono area with many old oaks, wetland, a lake and many species of wildlife including a fisher, an animal not usually seen in this area. Upon buying the lot, Mr. Boyke immediately subdivided, putting a driveway through the existing property and selling off the house on the street and building a house behind. His present proposal would be to add a driveway onto the existing driveway and to build another house, making the houses "three-deep" on the lot. Then to add a little foot path(road?) to allow to a forth lot to the back or lake side. ci1 access We have been involved in comprehensive planning on the village level and have, as the owners of a small office building been involved in development and met with Plymouth's planning Commission on several occasions. Our experience has taught us that the two most important elements in determining whether a property de­ velopment plan fits into comprehensive planning is consistancy and appropriateness. That is, is it consistant with the development in the village in plan and layout? Does Orono consistently allow developers to subdivide lots four deep without direct access to a thoroughfare or would this be the planning of 75 to 100 years ago? If Mr. Boyke had proposed such a development when he originally bought the lot would it have been approved as it is now, as a development ? Is this development appropriate to this area? Does it set back with other homes on the lake? ■ Page 376-4 of the Shoreland Management Amendment to the Zoning Code speaks to "sensitive resource management". The topographical maps show this house will be located several feet below the land on three sides. With hard-cover what does this mean in terms of run-off from the top house and surrounding drainage? Will this substantially increase pollutant drainage into the wetlands and ultimately the lake? Will this house have serious basement water problems - can it have a basement? Will it need a pumping system to the drainfield. Is this within the code for this area: (Page376-15 speaks to similar issues). Page 376-21 item "B" states "Each lot shall meet the minimum lot size and dimensional requirements set forth, elsewhere"... Does Mr. Boyke have a 2 acre lot without the fourth lot on the lake. These are only some of the issues here, but we feel they are certainly sufficient to deny this request. As stated earlier, we researched that land before we bought this house and found it had no access and was low with poor drainage. This was not a legitimate 2 house lot. It is certainly not a 3 house lot. Thank you for your consideration. September 12,1992 C'.Ti'c^ic.^c_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ Mr. Michael Gaffron Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Orono, Minnesota SEP 1 T 1092 Re: Proposal #1762- Paul W. Boyke Subdivision Dear Mr. Gaffron: My wife, Linda Miller, and I have resided at 275 Hollander Road for slightly more than one year. Our property abuts the northwestern edge" of the land proposed for subdivision. I have lived in the western suburbs of Minneapolis for forty years, and am quite familiar the beautiful wild areas which remain in and around the City of Orono. Lydiard Lake is a prime e.xample of one of these few remaining areas. Obviously, the City of Orono, and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources appreciate Lydiard Lake's uniqueness, and have thus designated it a "Natural Environment", in its Shoreland Management Ordinance, and Shoreland Overlay District Standards. One of the thrusts of the new legislation is to preserve and protect the fragile wetland environments. The natural beauty of Lydiard Lake, and the rural character of Orono v/ere two of the main reasons we moved to 275 Hollander Road. We have reviewed the materials available concerning Proposal # 1762, and have many reservations about what we have seen. Our first concern is the concept itself. The mandate of the State of Minnesota through the DNR is to preserve and protect the existing "Natural Environments" by limiting future development. Proposal # 1762 runs counter to the idea of protection and preservation by proposing new construction on the very edge of this unique wetland area. Our second concern was one of appropriateness. The existing level and character of development surrounding Lydiard Lake is not consistent with the proximity proposed in Mr. Boyke's plan. We also have concerns related to the actual suitability of the site itself for the proposed development. The bluff area to the north of the proposed building site is currently covered with many mature trees. VJhat would happen to them? If the are removed, wouldn't the wonderfully varied bird population which currently uses the area be gone as well? How would the introduction of more hardcover effect the run-off and drainage ecosystem already in place? What is the environmental impact of over 600 feet of graded driveway, 300 feet of which borders the edge of the wetlands? Is the soil appropriate for a septic system? What would be the consequence of septic system problems on Lake Lydiard. Our questions and concerns are too numerous to pursue in this letter. ! f. J The resources of the City of Orono Planning Commission and those of its staff will undoubtedly be used to address fully, not only our questions, but those of others, concerning this proposal. We feel strongly, that the proposed subdivision for new residential development on the edge of a designated "Natural Environment", runs counter to the concept and intent of protection and preservation of the unique Lydiard Lake area, and that it poses many questions concerning its appropriateness and feasibility. nission and fully, not s proposal. on for new id "Natural : protection lat it poses libility. SIS " 4. •8 SH if • K* W » 3 rt ft VI 9 3• «o«omm o r» ►- O • • 9< < *t • HO ►- ft c o 9 a HJ H y ►1 < •» I«|9 ff •ft »*< li • •1 •in S a ^1%i S o T’*% *2 o*n »1 9 ft ft 8 ®s M ft IS 9 9^ 9 K 0 8 1 9 r% 8 ►- ft r H 9 o 9 • f* • ti ^ ft a 8 * 9 H • 9*9 ^88 _ Q Jr jy H* 9 5 im 8 ’*5 H ft J b*an 9 H* ft 2o5 ►- O ^ o o a 9 ? •1 o ft ? ft ft ar Q »g. ft *1a . • — O 9 . >C <«• * ft 9T rr ft r* no V »-9 •S* o 9 *1 • o 9 9 0 ?•* a “•oSL «• ft / / V:» ?70 00 • 40 "3 /u - PfiOPCWTY OF> Fa UL. aoMtet Tczr ^0Tt BiOttf ! -iijcaos CAt'i y». i uo-r ^ meel _ OAOf/a M*J.td£MNL £.0.ncy rdinance /><r s-P TESTING INC.^ Designed Q~!>. 4> — Dot«:lI/X«, PH.612-497-3366 CITT OF OROHO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 473-7357 ZONING PILE #1762 55323 NOTICE OP PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: 9/24/92 TOi Paul W. Boyke 793 North Ferndale Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES TO: TYPE OP APPLICATION: Subdivision DATE OP TING: 9/21/92 VOTE: 7 For 0 Against Planning COBad.ssion re nds the following: Tabled for reasons noted below HOTBS AMD SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Polling of the Planning Commission indicated lakeshore lot width variance was not likely to be granted. Application was tabled pending: 1. Submission of revised proposal requiring no variances. 2. Submission of septic testing information. Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the October 19» 1992 meeting is October 9th. If the applicant has trouble obtaining additional informationr please contact the Zoning Department (473-7357). If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Planning Commission Chair Charlie Kelley, Maureen Bellows, Charles Schroeder, Stephen Peterson, Ed Cohen, Candace Rowlette, and Jeff Johnson. The following represented the City Staff: Assistant Planning and Zoning AdminIstrator Michael Gaffron and City Recorder Teri Naab. Mayor Peterson, Ed Cal Iahan and Gabriel Jabbour were present to represent the CouncII. Chair KeI Iey caIIed the meet Ing to order at 7:00 p.m. (#1) #1762 PAUL W. BOYKE, 793 NORTH FERNDALE ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 - 7:15 P.M. The AffidavIt of Pub Iication and Certificate of MaiI Ing were noted. Paul Boyke was present. ®^plsined that staff has not received septic testing for the lots and the applicant wishes to wait to submit such until after the meeting tonight. He referred to two additional letters received from neighbors, the Bergs and Higgins (Exhibit A). He explained the property is near Lydiard Lake. Previous subdivisions in the area have provided for land acquisition for a future cul- de-sac. Lot 1, with the existing house, has 2.12 acres of dry buildable land, and .25 acres wetland. Lot 2 has 2.57 acres dry and 1.36 acres wetland. The unique configuration proposed is due to the setback requIrements, the need for 2 acres of dry buildable land, and the need for septic sites on the property. Lot 1 has 165’ of lakeshore where 200’ is required, therefore a variance is needed, and Lot 2 has 340’ of lakeshore. Chair Kelley stated the subdivision is in a 2 acre zoning district and this proposal does not meet the standards of that district. He stated he is not in favor of the proposal. Peterson agreed with Chair Kelley and added the additional hardcover for the driveway wiI I also be a factor. AM the members agreed with Chair Keiley. Johnson asked to hear any pub IIc comments. Jim and Debbie Higgins, 259 Hoi lander Road, stated their opposition to the proposal, citing the preservation of wildlife in the area and privacy as reasons for their opposition. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 ZONING FILE #^762 - CONT. Chair Kelley reminded them that Boyke has enough acreage, but It is the need for variances that he Is opposing. Paul Bruer, 275 Hollancor Road, said he is concerned with the proximity of the proposed residence to the lake. Jim and Judith Hunder, 265 Hollander Road, agreed with their neighbors’ opposing remarks. Mrs. Hunder noted the issue of the need for variances ar.d felt the subdivision did not make sense. Boyke explained he first proposed this subdivision prior to the new shoreiand regulations, but was made to wait due to the moratorium. He noted the “point" area of the property is unbuildable due to current regulations. He is hoping to protect their views of the lake and also realize the full value of his property. He stated they do not have a desire for a dock or pier out onto the lake. He indicated he would be willing to divide off a second lot without making it a iakeshore lot. He added, their Intent Is not to change the wildlife of the area. Johnson asked about the strip of property near the cul-de-sac, the ownership of which is in question. Boyke explained that the City approved a metes and bounds division, but It was not recorded at the County correctly. He Is In the process of trying to work that issue out. Chair Kelley felt that septic testing for the site may determine where the property boundaries should be placed. It was moved by Chair Kelley, seconded ty Cohen, to table Application #1762 Paul W. Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road, pending septic test Information, 'yes 7, nays 0. (#2) #1764 AUSTIN EVANS, 255 LANDMARK DRIVE - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - PUBLIC HEARING 7:42 - 7:50 ?.M. The Affidavit of Pub Iication and Certificate of Mai 1 Ing were noted. Austin Evans was present. *,• # -»-• •«*^«**« • M* •W 4isss:•. ^'V' . :i.: ^■f. 10.206-10^UNIFORM FIRE CODEOb«Vuctlon of FIro Protection Equipment See. I0-2M. No penon shall place or keep any post, fence, vehicle, growth, trash, klorage or other material or thing near any fire hydrant, fire department connection or fire protection system control valve that would prevent such eauipmeM or hydrant from being immediately discernible or m any other manner nr hinder the fue department from gaining immediate access to saiddie chief.ACCOMRoodwsytlor FtroApparotuo i\,\«\»3Sec. W.207. (a) Rcqoircd Constniclion. Every building hereafter con­struct^ shall be accessible to fire department apparatus by way of access road­ways with all-weather driving surface of not less than 30 feet of unobstructed width with wV<i«a»e roadway turning radius capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and having a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertica clearance. Dead-end fire department access roads in excess of 150 feet long shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of fire department tppintus. EXCEPTION: Wlien there are not more than l>%*o Group R, Division as defined in the Building Code. the requircroeni of this section may be modiM when, in the opinion of the chief, rire-fighting or rescue operations would not be impaired. (hi Obatnictini. The icquired width of access roadways shafi not be obstructed in any manner, including parking of vehicles. NO PACING signs or other appropriaie notice.or both,prohibiting obsmictions may be required and shall be maintained. , „ (c) Eiteal. The access roadway shall be extended to within 150 fwt of a portioitt of the exterior walls of the first story of any building. Where the Kce« loadw^ cannot be provided, approved fire protection system or systems shall be iKOvIded as requited and appim^ by the chief. (d) Fbvpnlccthin ANemale. Where fire-protection systems approved by the fhiff are provided, the above required clearance may be modified. fel Ovcrsiiiiit. The chief shall have the authority to requjre an increase in the minimum access widths where such width is not adequate for fire or rescue opcfUiofis. of the Building Code and using design live loading sufficient to carry the imposed loadsofthe fire apparatus. PnmiMB Mufitillcntion . ^ „ , See. 10.208. Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new ^ ,inro^a oosilion as to be plainly visible and legible from the luTiIXiiiiiiiii III! iiiii|iirfr ' background. 1912 EDITIONIteyBox 10.209-10.901 !Sec. 10.209. When access to or within a strorfurt or an area is unduly diffi^lt because of secured openings or where immediaic access is neccssai^ for life­saving or fire-fighting purposes, the chief may require a key ^x to be an accessible location. The key box shall be a type approved by the chief and shall contaiD keys lo gain necessary access as required by ihe thief.Division HiINSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF FIRE- PROTECTION, LIFE-SAFETY SYSTEMS ANDAPPLIANCESImtallnllonSec 10.301. (a) TVpe Required. The chief si all designate th: tyi« and number of fire appliances to be installed and maintained in and upon all premises in the jurisdiction other than private dvrelliiigs. This shall ^ done accoiding lo the relative severity of probable fire, including tlw rapidity with which it way spread. Such appliances shall be of a type class of fire associated with such building or premises and shall have approval of Portable fire extinguishers shall be in accordance with U.F.C. Standard No. lO-l. ^ (b) Spfflal Haards. In occupancies of an especially hazardous nature or where special hazards exist in addition to the normal haz^ of the occupancy, or where access for fire apparatus is unduly difficult, additional safeguards may be required consisting of additional fire appliance units, more t^ one ty^ of appliance, or special systems suiuble for Ihe protection of the hazard involved. Such devices or appliances may consist of automatic fire alarm systems, amoi^- ic sprinkler or water spray systems, standpipe and hose, fixed or potUble fue exUnguishers. suitable asbestos blankets, breathing apparatus, manuM or aut^ matic covers, carbon dioxide, foam, halogenatcd and dry ctemical or other special fire-extinguishing systems. Where such systems are installed, th^ sha btin accordance with the applicable Uniform Fire Code Standards or siand^ of the National Fire Protection Association when Uniform Fire Code Standards do not apply. ................. . , (c) Water Supply^ An approved water supply capable of supplying r^uired fire flow for fire protection shall be provided lo all premises upon which building or portions of buildings are hereafter constructed. When any portion of the building protected is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply m a public street, there shall be provided, when required by the chief, on-siie fire hydrantt and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow. V^ter supply may consist of reservoirs, pressure unks, elevated tanks, w«er mains or other fixed system capable of supplying the requirrf fire flow. In Kding the requirements for fire flow, the chief may be guided by the standard published r 1/1 Bonestroo Rdsene Anctertik & Associates Engineers & Architects One G 8cne«foo P£ Rooen W Roieoe PE • josepn C Aroe^iiii P£ M^fv-n L Scwvil^ P£ R'C^af(3 E Tu^et. PE G R Cecil PE Thc*'^^s £ Noy«. PE Rl5Ceft G Sc»>ur<hL P£ Sown M ECerw>. C PA •Se^-or Ccx'su*rjm Howa»d A Sanfool PE ice<th A GooJon PE ffOCen R P'-'T^ie P£ R'c'^ara w R:srr PE Dav<j O Losiujta PE Rooen C Ruiseh A i A A Bcu-tJon PE Man'll A Hanion PE M<nae» T Rauf-iunn PE Ted K Ped PE Thonras R Armerson A i A Donjkl C BurgaoX. PE Thomas E Angui P£ Gary P R>ijnoef pe isrraei MafTir'fj PE P Rjy PE .Agrei M Ring a * C P Thomas \A/ pptr'son PE M-vhaei C L>^Xh PE Jamej R VaiancJ PE Jerry o Peonch pe icenneth P Arsderson PE Mar* R Rt?ifi PE Ma/k A Sf^ PE Gary W Monen PE Oarwfi j Edgerton Pt p»*.;.p j Cashe l PE Var* D PE V e? B .erve^ p £ L *»•* 0 G'a^e' 'f! P£ Aa-en L W erref! PE p "odd Fcner PE Aer* R >app PE Snavvn O Gustafson I Cec A> Oivief. PE Charles A Er<ksor> Leo M Pas^eHky Haran M Olson James P EngeesaMcx September 17,1992 Mr. Mike Gaffron City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Ciystal Bay. MN 55323 Re: #1762 Paul Boyke Subdivision File No. 139-1762 Dear Mike: We have reviewed the proposed subdivision of Lot 1, Block 1, Lauranne Woods Addition on the Paul Boyke property, located to the east of Lydiard Lake. Subsequent to our site inspection, there are several engineering issues that should be noted. Lydiard Lake is a DNR protected water, identified as Basin No. 27-1 59P. The accepted ordinary high water elevation (OHWL) of the lake is 970.9. For setback purposes this elevation contour should be considered the shoreline of Lydiard Lake. The City’s municipal code requires certain setbacks to shorelines and these have been shown appropriately on the site plan. The code also requires a 200 foot shoreline for each lot to have lake access. If Lot 1 is planned to have lake access, the westerly lot line of Lot 2 should be realigned to provide 25 feet of additional shoreline to Lot 1. If Lot 1 is indeed planned to have lake access by means of the 10 foot wide strip of land along the north property line, a grading plan should be provided to show any planned improvements in that area. We understand that the bituminous access road from North Femdale Road is a private drive which is platted as an outlot with joint resident ownership. To eliminate an undesirable "flag" lot with driveway easements, we recommend that the 30 ’ by 407 ’ "flag pole" also be platted as an outlot with joint ownership by both lots. This would be in accordance with the code requirements for a minimum lot footage of 200 feet. Drainage and utility easements should be provided five feet wide along both sides of the proposed lot division line. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. SDG:lk 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 6l2-636-#< p CiAriifu, O-'^cL Cofy^r^iSSjOt-^ *^ J SEP 2 1 1998 Vl>^ Qfe U3r*'f,nc- rn r<2.c2C^cl 4tj4^'v Oro^Xi^ec^ iii /7^2^ rr.:L^KOoYV^, (JntbrtijLn<^J^ ~it> bf. ^he/N:, "fK‘<i €<><LA(k-^. ixQ/c^^ paipe.-i.-lt. bu.*V uuv&U'iD ■c^'^Cz>ur<2 4^3^ (3Ct^i(:9<?ra.4ii -jW u XLh ftl\.<AA cto«-4d build -jist^ Cicc^ rD<3c) >30 -4v XJUM d/otnao,"Joa, nob inW(k/Jt- LO.dk D-*r Onci. C^rCi. \Li6^ •S'lj.SbCjrv-N Lvktcb fun C^DOi::/ Ctv' OrTOsizdo Or> '/bc.p Klorlkick. ^ iftb o>-v O/ipe^^Ky uxii d^L>«^lcjOeci uJe^ prDpiAj a Oul - dc-i^o. dbof ^Lbv.'fe. 6Li^urc.A UU>A^;^ cll ^rolOj:^Ufc.<i ^juc^A^irs cll proiobil.dy nsxV bt. huiff. ^ do be. GDPp(t»dcid 0^-^ QjOu^-j ’Ccx^ Qa^ 4^ ^fic- :^ts^id\cc)d. ePScjervKa-''^uLcJu kctx- loe<2v-v UC?^ CiAL CtA^dckrvb 'fiv' (imerofino^ u«jb\i . LOc eoGDL^c^jpu.. >^l,-kj 0^ r\eiQkbDrK<>:?<inob CVx)/^ es-ltibl<slvj<r piS'bo-s cn rka 6tJ^cA.-^<3c. 'ino^L. ^ICU'.y^ U-A 4d UD iO- GoASid^crboriS Atb bSfYvj- <3>pfeAs 0^1^ CorAdipo*^ l A dk- 6l>y|^S <^^^c ffiLi O I h>n\ .. Oit\dabd'bt. Sgi m Mr. Michael Gaffron Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Orono, Minnesota CITYO* ORONC SEP 2 1 1992 September 17, 1992 Re: Proposal <^762 - Paul W. Boyke Subdivision Dear Mr. Gaffron: My husbfluid Jim and I are concerned about Paul W. Doyke's proposed subdivision. We have lived at 259 Hollander Road for two fluid a hfldf ycMurs fluid our property borders Mr. Boyke's lot. Our property fluid Mr. Boyke's flure beautiful exflunples of the natural wild environment flureas that Orono has worked hflurd to preserve fluid protect. Lydiard Ledce euid its siirrounding wetlfluids, located in the proposed subdivision area, is home to many types of birds, wildlife, trees, and plantlife which my family «uid I enjoy observing fluid protecting. One concern we have about Proposfld ^762 is that the proposed subdivision is quite close in proximity to Lydiflurd LflOce fluid its surrounding wetland area. Does the City of Orono consider this proximity appropriate in meeting the standflurds set forth in the Shorelfluid Mfluiagement Ordinance document? Will the subdivision proximity be appropriate in preserving this natural wetlfluid/lflOce area fluid protecting it from decay? The building site, as proposed, appears to be placed on a sloping flurea of Ifluid or bluff with the house sitting below Ifluid on three sides. What effect will drsdnage or Ifluid erosion, resulting from removed of lflu*ge mature trees from the building site, have on Lydiflurd Ledce? What effect will a sewer/septic system, placed on a bluff impact eurea, ha'^’e on the wetland eurea below, especially considering storm water riinoff? We feel that the proposed new construction will have a negative impact on this beautiful natural shoreland area and that the proposed stibclivision is not appropriate for the Lydiard Lake To:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Proa:Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager Date:October 15, 1992 Subject: Subdivision #1762, Paul Boyke - Septic Review I have reviewed the proposed septic system testing and design for this property and would make the following comments. LOT 1, BLOCK 1 - EAST ONE-HALF This lot has an existing residence with an on-site sewage treatment system. The system is a conforming system according to MPCA Rules Chapter 7080 and City of Orono Code. The system includes two 1,000 gallon pre-cast concrete septic tanks and approximately 1,000 s.f. of shallow drainfield trenches. The septic system was installed in 1987 at which time soil testing indicated a three foot separation between the trench bottom and the seasonally high water table as indicated by mottling and is presumed to be installed as designed. The existing drainfield is approximately ten feet from the proposed driveway for the west lot. Due to the elevation of the existing driveway, the proposed driveway for the west lot would likely require fill to be constructed wh.ch would Impede the natural drainage and could adversely effect the function of the drainfield. Driveway specifications should be provided including a topographic map detail so the impact ({f any) may be noted. Soil testing has been provided indicating an alternate drainfield site for a 4-bedroom home to the east and north of the existing drainfield. This area would also be suitable for a shallow trench system. Drainage from the existing driveway would flow directly across the alternate drainfield site, therefore a drain tile or other method for redirecting the drainage must be incorporated at the time the future site is to be ';sed. Specific alternate site details are included below: Depth of seasonal saturation (mottling) is 4* to 4*2", requiring shallow trenches. Slope is 4%. The percolation rate averages 7.9 minutes per inch at 12 inches. Drainage must be directed away from drainfield site. as ■ ^ V ha II * Subdivision 1X762, Septic Review October 15, 1992 Page 2 LOT 1, BLOCK 1 - WEST ONE«HALF Soil testing and septic system design has been provided for a 5-bedroom home including primary and alternate dzainfield sites. Both sites meet MPCA Rules Chapter 7080, however a 25* section of the alternate drainfield site encroaches within the 20* setback required for driveways. The proximity of the driveway to the alternate site cannot be avoided due to site limitations. Driveway speci.fications should be provided to show that drainage will not adversely effect this site. Due to the proximity of tie access road to the septic sites, snow fencing will be required around both drainfield sites prior to the issuance of final plat approval. Specific septic system details are included belowi Depth of seasonal saturation (mottling) is 1* 2" to 3* 6*, requiring a mou d. Slope at the primary nd alternate drainfield sites is up to 5%. - Percolation rates average 6.2 minutes per inch at 12*. - A 10' driveway setback variance will be required for the alternate site. lARY The site inspection revealed several concerns regarding drainage around the drainfield sites due to the existing driveway for the east lot as well as the proposed driveway for the west lot. Additional information will be required regarding the proposed driveway to assure that a 10* setback from both the existing system for the east lot and the proposed alternate system for the west lot is feasible as well as to assure that it is possible to drain the driveway away from both of these septic sites. The alternate drainfield site for the existing residence will also be required to assure that drainage can be directed around this site from the existing driveway. Provided that acceptable information can be provided regarding these drainage questions, staff is comfortable with the septic plans provided. One condition of the subdivision must be that both the existing and proposed drainfield sites must be staked using snow fencing to prohibit any traffic from compacting these sites. The fencing must be installed prior to the granting of a final plat approval and any motorized travel across these areas. Isv Tot Froas Dates Subjects Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse» City Administrator ^ Jeanne A. Mabusthr Building & Zoning Administi^ii^ ^^ 4 December 8, 1992 ^ *1768/1786 Dr. William R. and Rhonda T. Omlier 1860^^^ Shadywood Road - Variances - Conditional Use Permit States of Coaprebeiisiee Appllcatl At the November 9th meeting# Council considered the side setback portion of the multiple land use application independent of the other hardcover and land alteration portion (review Exhibits F and G). Council chose to act on the side setback portion as there was a need to proceed with the current major remodeling of the existing residential structure approved with the building permit issued October 1# 1992. Application #1768 covers the hardcover variances and #1786 is the conditional use portion of the application that deals with grading activities that could not be authorised under the building permit for new construction. The Planning Commission has reviewed the comprehensive land use application at both their October and November meetings. Pertimeiit Ordinances 1. Section 10.22# Subd. 2. Review of hardcover. 0*75* setback area Allowed ■ 0 s.f. Existing - 0 s.f. Proposed “ 0 s.f. 10#200 s.f. 75-250* setback area ■ 23#800 s.f. Approved with Building Permit 16/1/42 House " 2#930 s.f. Garage - 815 s.f. Driveway ■ 1#755 s.f. Sidewalk - 150 s.f. Steps ■ 39 s.f. Patio ■ 300 8. Deck *0.0 Retaining Walls « 0.0 Landscape Areas *0.0 Original Plan 2#930 s.f. 951 s.f. 2#590 s.f. 226 s.f. 12 s.f. 547.2 s.f. 231.9 s.f. 0.0 s.f. 0.0 s.f. Amended Plan 2#9i0 s.f. 833 s.f.* 2#026 s.f. 195 s.f. 33 s.f. 436 s.f. 208 s.f. 238 s.f. 410 s.f. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE I 5#989 S.f. or 25.2% 7#488.1 s.f. or 31.4% 7#309 s.f. or 30.7% * Area revised to reflect extension of garage addition along existing north side setback Zoning Application #1768/1786 December 8, 1992 Page 2 2. Section 10.03, Subd. 21 - Applicant proposes grading and filling activities in excess of 100 cubic yards that cannot be authorized under the building permit. Applicant proposes the filling of approximately 300-400 cubic yards for expansion of paved driveway and turnaround area. List of Bxhlbits Application #1768 Applicant's Addendum Hardcover StatesMnt - Groundworks, Landscape Architect Plat Nap Property Owners List Plan Approved with Building Permit 6 as Amended per Council's Approval of Side Setback Variance Approval Resolution of Side Setback Variance Applicant's Comparison of Hardcover Facts A - B - C - D - B - P- G - H - 1-1-3 - Hardcover Pact Sheets J - Elevations K - Application #1786 L - Hardcover Statement - Groundworks, Landscape Architect M - Gustafson Report 11/4/92 N - Topographic/Drainage Plans O - Site Plan/Landscape Plan P - Retaining Wall Section Description of Request - Application #1768 On October 1, 1992 the City issued a building permit for improvements to existing residence consisting of a partial second story addition over existing structure, two-story addition at the south side and an addition to the two-stall garage. Review Exhibit 0. The building permit was issued with all improvements meeting the required setbacks and hardcover was maintained at 25% within the 75-250' setback area. The Building staff explained to the applicants that it may be very difficult to prove hardships after all pertinent ordinances were satisfied with the issuance of the building permit. Please review Exhibit O, the amended or final plan includes an expansion of the existing drive adjacent to the^residence providing a turnaround. The plan also calls fcr/ an expansion in width of the access drive within the 250-5i>--;' setback area. Other improvements include a deck and patio areas along the lakeside of the residence. Pilling activities requested with #1786 will require the installation of retaining walls and landscaped areas to be underlined with geotechnic fabric (landscaped areas underlain with fabric ■ 410 s.f. or 1.7%, retaining wall areas « 238 s.f. or 1%). All of these improvements require hardcover variances within the 75-250' and 250-500' setback areas. Review factual findings noted above. I Zoning Application #1768/1786 December 6, 1992 Page 3 Review of Hardcover Increases The following improvements result in hardcover increasesi 1. Additional paved area over amount approved with building permit ■ 271 s.f. or l.ll. 2. Increase in sidewalk area over that approved with building permit ■ 45 s.f. or 0.1%. 3. Increase in patio area over that approved with building permit - 136 s.f. or 0.5%. 4. Increase of 208 s.f. or 0.8% lakeside deck where none was approved with building permit. 5. Landscape areas underlain with plastic shown at 410 s.f. or 1.7%. These areas were also not included with original hardcover facts submitted with building permit. 6. 238 s.f. or 1% increase in hardcover for retaining walls proposed with land alteration permit. Gsnsrsl CowBsiits on Final Flan At the October Planning Commission meetingr hardcover was proposed at 31.4%. Applicant was advised to reduce hardcover improvements. Applicants final plan shows hardcover at 30.7% within the 75>250* setback area. Hardcover expansion within the 250-500* setback area remains the same with an increase of 138 s.f. or 2.6%. Applicant has reduced patio and deck is^rovements in the lakeshore yard in addition to reducing the proposed pavement expansion in the 75-250* setback area. Revised hardcover facts now include retaining wall areas and the landscape areas underlain with geotechnic fabric. The landscape architect advises that the fabric is to be installed in areas where erosion is of prime concern as a result of the proposed land alteration. These areas are shown as the shrub planting area in your landscape plan* Exhibit 0. Landscape areas designated as groundcover area shall remain as natural groundcover. Review of Application #1786 The applicant filed a separate conditional use permit to allow the filling needed to complete paving improvesients proposed in hardcover variance Application #1768. As already noted above^ the filling project will result in 271 s.f. of additional paved area* 410 s.f. of landscape area underlain with geotechnic and 238 s.f. of retaining wall area. Zoning Application 11768/1786 December 8^ 1992 Page 4 The land alteration will require the installation of two tiered retaining walls adjacent to paved Improvements to be installed at a 3 to 3>l/2* height and to be constructed of decorative masonry block# review Exhibit B. Please review Exhibit M# the Engineer's Report. Gustafson notes that the improvements will not significantly impact or alter drainage in the area. The land alterations also include a section of retaining wall to be installed in the lakeshore yard as a result of the proposed patio# walkway and deck construction. Hardship Etatsasat Please review Exhibits B# C and L. Applicants claim special parking needs and the need to provide Dr. Omlie immediate and safe access from property at times of emergencies. The statements also note the need for handicap access to residence from vehicles# noting that there have been three accidents in the drive as a result of the limited paved area. Applicant's landscape architect has advised that there will be no appreciable impact on the treatment of runoff because of the increase in hardcover. Portions of the hardcover from driveway expansion will be partially channeled west to County Road 19. Mr. lArson also notes that the City Engineer confirms no negative impact. Plaaalng CCmIssIoo KecasMendatloB The Planning Commission voted unanimously to deny the Omlie's hardcover variance and conditional use permit based on the following findingss 1. Hardcover variance was considered far too excessive at a time the property was being completely redeveloped. The time to review such considerations would have been during the early planning stages for the redevelopment of property. 2. Hardships presented by applicant were not acceptable based on required criteria established in zoning code. Options of Action Denial per Planning Commission's recommendation; Approval per applicants' hardship statement. This approval would grant a variance increase from 25.1% to 30.7% within the 75-250' setback area and hardcover increase from 31.4% to 34% in the 250-500' setback area. Approval of these variances will include the filling of 300-400 cubic yards for driveway and turnaround improvements on the property; I I. V ► p t Zoning Application #1768/1786 December 8» 1992 Page 5 Other. Bell Action To provide staff with conceptual direction so that an appropriate resolution can be prepared and presented for Council's review and action at their January 11* 1993 meeting. Isv x'/jh... u ,,m» ia a H •P riL-i \ ' CITY OP ORONO - VARIAMCB APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the~Fact Fees (Double application fee) "IX i ./ /M/) .0^ d&Lnrd (0Qs‘AJ/O PROPERTY INFORHATIOH Site Address_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _^ Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) Attach Jegal description to application if not included on required^ suri^gl^ (month/year) CITY OF FVmEQFnCE U50200000 01 CEH 175.eC CHECK TL 175.eC RECEIPT-THm YiJ H252400 COOl kOl T02: 09/WDate Pro^rtv Acquired ^ I {do)(d6^2l^ also o«m the adjacent parcels of land. Present'nofeof property: residential ____other (specify) Zoning District:_____________________________________0.^^_________________ APPLICANT Phone (home) ’^*7/ Name^^^b. i/tlliMi A/Od /BLl9<I aT^Phone (wor)c) Address: /^(aO S^<A^yLx:Oci i&. City; _ _ _ _ ZUtt^!S^39f _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _'_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ ___ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 0 asm Name Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Describe request in detail: Estimated Construction Cost VARIANCES RBQOIRBD _ _ Lot Area Setback: _ Lot Width Hardcover _ _^Lot Coverage Front Side _ _ Rear Average Lakeahore Other (specify) BARDSBIP/DBSCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual prtperty 4a/t7^ shects(attach additional KBQOIRED SUBMITTALS ^ ... All cf tha folloirlDa inforaation want b« aqbaitted by thg_ appliCTtiga daf In ordar for vonr applicatioB to be considerad C0HDl«tat 1. 2. CoDplated Application Form Cartifiad Property Owners List o£ owners within 150* (you must obtain ^this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. - -Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8H"xll* for reproduction). . . .* w5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%"xll*). €. Sketches or plans of floor 4 elevation views (provide 1 copy 8%«xll^)r^ 7, Ae «n addendum to this application# please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vonr variance application la net complete if the above Jjifnimstion ha« been included. AFPLICAMT'S 8I6MAT0RB The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator# agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this aralicati^Uv and certifies that the information supplied is true and corrpg(^4^^^he^^ly^ of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature ( \/ ( i Date 9-15- — ifMMMg 8I6MAT0RE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorises reasonable entry onto the property by City staff# consultants# agents# Cosmiission membe»# and Council members for purposes of investiga- Owner's Signature _______ fL. /______________Date ■ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before ^e Planning Cosmlaslon Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held m the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all s^edul^ BMtings of the Planning Ccmmission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting# please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building » Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. ^ /'/u- i WILLIAM R. OMUE RHONDA T. OMUE 1860 Shadywood Road Wayzata» MN 55391 Phone #471-0824 i*rr t;a T- 7 September 9, 1992 C'TYC'^ CRONL iuBEBu'i/eU Jeanne Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator Gty of Orono 1335 South Brown Road Post Office Box 66 Qystal Bay, MN 55323 SEP 1 7 i092> Re: Zoning Variance Application 1860 Shadywood Road, PID #17-117-23 24 0018 Dear Ms. Mabusth: Please accept this application letter with attachments as our request for a zoning variance as pertains to "hardcover” limitations. The reason we are requesting this variance is to make it possible to enter and exit our property by automobile in a safer manner. Because of the configuration of the drive onto our property and the distance to our existing attached garage from County Rd. #19, we currently must back our automobile approximately 130 feet to exit. In just the past year we have experienced three backing accidents. We are also trying to make entry into our home more accessible for handicapped visitors. We are now in the process of remodeling our front entrance to make our home more accessible. In conjunction with this, we want to make it possible to transport handicapped passengers right up to the front entrance. Under existing conditions, hsmdicapped passengers caimot be transported closer than 40 feet. Due to typical congestion on our existing drive, the distance is usually greater. With professional assistance, we have developed nvo alternate plans which would greatly reduce the extensive backing necessary to enter and exit our property and make our home more accessible to handicapped visitors. These plans provide for adding a third automobile storage space to the existing attached garage, moving the garage entrance to the south side, and adding a circular configuration to the existing driveway. -* ,H; . • /T v\. The proposed increase in garage capacity and reconfiguration of the drive will cause hardener in Zone #2 of our property to exceed the normally allowed 25% limit by 4 or 5% However, due to the unique concentration of hardcover in the northwestern sector of our property, any runoff must take a south and then easterly directional flow, over a large expa^ of grassed area, a distance of at least 130 feet, before any runoff could reach the lalo^re. The end result is, and will continue to be, very adequate cleansing and filtering of runoff consistent with the intent of the city ’s hardcover ordinance. The above considerations are set forth below in greater detail and structured by the major points enumerated in the variance application instructions: I, ^ past year alone, we have had three vehicle collisions resulting from the extensive backing required to exit on to County Rd. #19. The configuration of the single width driveway, and the location of the existing attached garage, requires that an automobile must be backed some 130 feet to exit our property from the attached garage. This situation is further complicated in that there is nonnaUy three vehicles to accommodate on a daily basis but, only attached garage storage for two. Because the driveway is single width, moving either of the two vehicles retires aicn backing out any vehicle on the drive. If ihe third vehicle is parked in the approach to the detached garage, located next to the highway, the cautious choice is to first move this vehicle out onto the highway and use that area as a turn around to avoid backing onto the highway. The detached garage is used as storage for boats and yard maintenance equipment. The logiv solution to alleviating the need to move two vehicles, when one of the garaged vehicles exits, is to add garage space for a third. Because of the wy tte attached garage is currently situated, it cannot be expanded without changing w direction from which vehicles enter. Entrance is currently from the west (feeing County Rd. #19). The existing attoched garage cannot be expanded to the north because there is insufficient space available between it and the north lot line. Neither can it be expanded to the south as the southerly building line of the garage is immediately adjacent to the front entrance of the house direction the garage can be expanded is to the west (toward County Rd. #19). Expanding to the west requires that the entrance must be from the South. a To enter the garage from the south requires that the driveway be redesigned and expanded. Of primary importance is safe and practical ingress and egress frona the property onto County Rd. #19 and improving accessibility for handicapped visitors. Two alternate plans for driveway redesign are submitted with this ^plication. PLAN A Provides for access to the attached garage from the south rad a second entrance to our property. It resolves our safety concerns rad is our first choice. Plan A provides the following features: i aml ‘ -«.nrir (•Vi / •'« if'\^. y - Storage for one additional vehicle in attached garage. In normal daily use (3 vehicles), the only backing necessary is to clear the garage entrance. In normal daily use it eliminates any need to back onto busy County Rd. #19, when exiting the property. In normal daily use, no vehicle shuffling is necessary when a vehicle exits the property. • Provide improved accessibility into our home for the handicapped. • Can accommodate five visitor vehicles before any extensive backing is required. All five vehicles can access County Rd. # 19 without baddng. PLANB Provides for access to the attached garage from the south but uses only the single existing entrance. Although it resolves most of our safety concerns by reducing the need for extensive backing it is our second choice. Plan B provides the following features: - Storage for one additional vehicle in attached garage. In normal daily use (3 vehicles), the only backing necessary is to clear the garage entrance. In normal daily use it eliminates any need to back onto busy County Rd. #19 when exiting the property. In normal daily use, no vehicle shuffling is necessary when a vehicle exits the property. Provides improved accessibility into our home for the handicapped. Can accommodate three visitor vehicles before any extensive backing is required. All three can access County Rd. #19 without backing. EXISTING SITUATION (outUned for comparison) - Storage in attached garage for only two of three daily used vehicles. In normal daily use, extensi\'e backing (130 feet) is required to exit properly. In normal daily use, it is usually necessary to move a second vehicle to avoid backing onto busy County Rd. #19. : -T. ^ .4^ vO - • ! • vEitor vehicles typically must exit by backing onto Count)* Rd. #19. Shuffling of visitor vehicles results in numerous false exits onto County Rd. # 19. These vehicles occupy the traffic lanes while waiting for others to exit before re-entering. • Handicapped visitors must bc transported some 40 to 100 feet across our yard, after exiting their vehicle, to reach the front door to our house. We submit that either of these alternate plans create a reasonable balance between the intent of the hardcover ordinance and resolution of the safety/accessibility issues inherent in our existing situation. Above, we have attempted to depict the safety issues a«ff^a»<>d with normal ingress and egress of three vehicles on a daily basis. However, these concerns multiply several times over on evenings, holidays, and weekends when we have visitors. On a typical weekend or holiday it is veiy conunon for several additional vehicles to occupy our drive and, when this happens, we usually have gridlock. Our drive will currently park some seven vehicles and not too infrequently it is filled. Parking must be on our drive, as parking is not permitted on County Rd. #19. We have requested a parking exception on County Rd. # 19 on several occasions for our visitors, but without success. In our current situation, when a visitor is to exit, it usually requires the shuffling of several vehicles and false exits on to County Rd. #19. These vehicles then temporarily must park on County Rd. #19 while the departing visitor exits. Although nans A and B submitted herewith will not necessarily eliminate these safety problems altogether, it will go a long way toward alleviating it. Most importantly, either of the plans submitted will essentially ^Miminate the safety hazard inherent in extensive backing row required to exit our property, particularly the need to back onto County Rd. #19. Among our most regular visitors are our elderly parents and a handicapped sister who have particular difficulty backing their vehicles. We are very concerned for their safety. Equally important, both Plan A and B allow for vehicle transport of handicapped passengers right to the front door, which allows them more convenient access into our home. In particular, this will make our home more accessible to our handicapped sister and disabled grandparent. n. VARIANCE WILL NOT VIOLATE INTENT OF HARDCOVER ORDINANCE Due to the unique topographical features of our property and the concentration of hardcover in the northwestern sector, and the large expanse of grassed area to the soutis and east the requested variance will not deprive runoff of extensive filtering. With the exception of that part of our property lying North of the existing drive (which runoff flows to County Rd. #19), all runoff flows South across grassed area 6 *• * i• - .-i *£J J of Lot 27 into lot 28. Lot 28 contains essentially a clear, flat, prassed area about M feet wide that runs some 285 feet from County Rd. #19 to the lakeshore. It is void of hardcover. Runoff flrom the hardrovrnir^flnw*> 'joiiiliiTljricross Lot 27 and then into Lot 28. The average diMance^hiTliardraver runoff must flow to reach the lakeshore, easterly acrossTjbt 28, is over 200 feet. The minimum this hardcover runoff would have to flow easterly across Lot 28 to reach the lakeshore is about 130 feetrTuirther, due to a slight bem which runs along the lakeshore, it is unlikely that — any of this runoff would flow directly into the lake. Thus, the amount of Altering^ runoff will receive is probably superior to most typical situations. In conclusion, we request your thoughtful consideration of this variance request. The plans we have submitted for redesign of our attached garage and drive will alleviate the extensive baddng of vehicles now required to exit our property. The extensive backing of vehicles has resulted in several recent accidents and leaves us with fear for the safety of ourselves and visitors, particularly the elderly and disabled. We are also very concerned for the safety of the many bikers and pedestrians who pass in front of our drive on County Rd. #19. We believe our request constitutes a reasonable balance between competing interests of safety/accessibi!ity and the environment. Approving our request will provide safer conditions by which we can enter and exit our property, will provide better accessibility for the handicapped, and also provide for adequate Altering of hardcover runoff. We respectfully ask concurrence and approval. Respectfully yours. William R. and Rhonda T. Omlie Attachments: 1. Hardcover Calculation Worksheets. 2. CertiAcate of Survey designating existing hardcover. 3. Sketches showing proposed improvements. (Plan A and Plan B) 4. Written acknowledgements by close neighbors. 5. Initial application fee of $175.00. 6. Property Information Sheet. 7. Ceiled Property Owners list. 8. Plat Map. 9. Data Privacy Advisory. 1 GROUND WORKS COMPANY Specialized Landscape Care 4-I»a»*4>CC«V® ^iwi_4e rp>ayvi cjE" n |Slo C©u.rstV I 2^ l£)C'-*^Ni eiKm»-y ^n-' in +4 i^f4X>t-<i^'p M ms <> rA. CONSULTATION DESIGN INSTALLATION <I22U IS Inl Street West • Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 • Phone: (612) 440-4114 RUN DATE 09/08/92#* ** * •**y BATCH OOS.* V NEKM2PIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONNERS LIST REPORT NO. PAGE PI955A01AAOOR 0»MER NAME TAXPAYER . NAME/AOOR 58 I7-117>25 24 000201675 SHAOYNOOO RO CAN nuOTSON 6LETM .R TILLOTSON 1875 SHAOYNOOO RD .; HAYZATA MN 55591 58 17-117-25 24 000500038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO .0 R TILLOTSON/N A TILLOTSON CLENN R TILLOTSON •1875 SHAOYNOOO RO NAY2:ATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 24 000401880 SHAOYNOOO RO OURNOOO A TAYLOR OLGA M TAYLOR 1880 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA TM 55391 • *. 58 17-117-25 24 0007 ‘ PROP AOOR 01655 SHAOYNOOO RO . . ,0*#«R. NAME •TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR HARK R SALOEN mark R SALOEN 1855 SHAOYNOOO RO':: - HAYZATA >81 55591' 38 17-117-23 24 0008 01665 SHAOYNOOO RO 0 J CORPORATION GLETM TILLOTSON 1675 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA m 55391 38 17-117-23 24 0014 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO COFFEE LANDINGS COFFEE LANDINGS 4722 N FAIR HILLS RO Mirt4ET0NKA HN 55345 ■ . ■ . . , •' , w. ' 58 17-117-23 24 0015 . . . r PROP AOOR 01620 . SHAOYNOOO RO •' (M4ER NAME TAXPAYER ; NAME/AOOR TAP SCHERBER T- L A P P SCHERBER 1820 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA 55391 0^ •l o ^8 r' 56 17-117-25 24 0016 01840 SHAOYNOOO RO JOHN J BURKE ETAL JOHN J BURKE 1840 SHAOYNOOO ROAD NAYZATA MN 55591 38 17-117-25 24 0017 01856 SHAOYNOOO' RO HAD SEIFERT JR MILTON H SEIFERT JR 1056 SHAOYI«X>D RO HAYZATA MN 55391 (m; PROP AOOR OtttfR NAME 58 ‘17-117-25 24 0018 01860 ; SHAOYNOOO RO N R A R T OHLZE Ofi O '.: TAXPAYER ' ) NILLXAH A RHONDA OHLIB . NANE/AOOR ' i860 SHADVNOOO RO -. ' •• . •V',.T^.I^YZATA m RO S5591 • *. «. •%. t,' • .7 38 17-117-25 24 0019 01890 SHAOYNOOO RO. V J CASTAGNA A N J CASTAGNA VANESSA J A NEIL J CASTAGNA 1890 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA 55591 TOTAL BATCH 003 00011 • 4 >Vl.* • 4 *• .•*V i. <.1. .'7' ^ :u. # i •• • - ‘ - . -8 - V . • • • • B J . 'b-j 9 * 0 .»• *1# • i. '.'1 .r‘■ * ,• * ' • • •- • V‘V.. , .l/i!.* L ; *'• X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARB AN ACCLMATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF ■'HE HEFMEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE BEST ,0F MY KNONLEOCE AND BELIEF., , ^ > U* DATEkhlim, • ••• • • * I .J, 6 • lY »* a m• i -h S • V' • t * • — a•i •• V' c»* *<»0 5 *♦ ar M T . * ®» ®» c : <0 a*-.(i *.r •i ^ o . ij'-iaan ‘ % * i •! • M? '♦S 9 n. r • i • {! ; ?n S S.’!.,• fi M A a tt M « . ‘IrtwA- V '. •• a ulff a < * •8*:M-fr8^ . .i»n M •. I |s:8$ I«:, : S S? 9 : "i:8SSo- » i i * 4 C> '.•V: . * -I Er ■1 . . ?* . * t , » I irkir:';’'Mm ♦ .4 »! I *• ft ,£,!’5- v.:•< (, (<; s*:i 1 .'I ••'" ,•V- • ( • • I! ?■■■' <1^ ••v:' : :i':! {V; • ' ■’ I vi- *7 • I'l? i:“ .' r 'Yti . iv.\* i --i' .iiI • » * ! »ir* : . : I JUJl. • >; 'l:'!f ^1 ' '.; .1 *1 45.0 M. I ‘i i >l t 45 o ^2 HjTo • • E <5■ f »5,5 w ■ > ?i« 3- ’’ (?P ^ ^ • • • • II a gsna^ ^jSgSjo : 4 '. •I# • * V*** • V ’ A RBSOLOnON GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6(B) AND SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 PIU «1768A WHEREAS, Dr. William R. and Rhonda T. Omlie (hereinafter "t'^e applicants") are owners of the property located at 1860 Shady' >od Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and leg ' ly described as follows: Lot 27 except the north 15 feet, said 15 feet being measured at right angles from the north line of said lot, and Lot 28, Shadywood, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property")? and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) and Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit the construction of a 13' 8" X 21.2' garage addition located 8' 9" from the north side lot line Instead of the required 10', these improvements result in an increase of 18.2 s.f. bringing hardcover to 25.2% where only 25% is allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1768. 2. The property is located in the LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 1/2 acre in area or 21,780 s.f. The property consists of 39,300 s.f. or .9 acres. 3. The Orono Pli'nning Commission reviewed the comprehensive vaj..ance application of the applicants on October 19, 1992 and recommended acting on the setback portion of the application and tabling all action on the remaining hardcover improvement. The application as amended was recommended for approval based upon the following findings: Page 1 of 4 k. 4. 5. A. The addition will extend no closer to the north side lot line than the existing north wall of the garage . B. The overall architectural design of the structure will be impacted by having to retain a 10' side setback for the garage addition. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions^ light# air not pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant# but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission# report's by City staff# comments by the applicant and the effect of the variances on the health# safety ard welfare of the community. COMCLOSIOHS# OR]Oh:AMD COK^ITIOMS Based upon one or more of the above fi ings# the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25# Subdivision 6 (B) to permit a 13' 8" x 21.2' addition to the exising garage located 8' 9" from the north side lot line and denies the variance to Section 10.22# Subdivision 2 that would result in an increase of 0.1+% hardcover# subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. Upon application ui an amended building permit# applicant shall also submit a revised site plan that maintains hardcover at 25% within the 75-250' setback area. Author ties granted by this variance run with the prop.'irty not with the applicant# but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council Pagv* 2 of 4 approval, or this variance will expire on that date (November 9, 1993). 3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their ht ^s, successors and assigns hereby agree to the .cording of this resoluti.:«n in the chain of title c ;he property. Af^jpted by the City Council of the Cii.y of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 9th day of November, 1992. ATTEST t Dorothy M. Haili/i, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of November 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson t Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 4 I « R« •nd Fhond® T. IttfO Shadyvood Road Waytata, Wf 55391 10/28/92 hardcover summary analysis •all nuabara rapraaant aquara faat. Approvad par PROPOSED Bda. Pamit PLAN "B" 10/01/92 10/19/92 REVISED PLAN "O* Chanqa ll/li/92 20NB #1 (O' to 75' from laRashora) - Ho ground covar pamittad a total hardcover in zone: TOTAL PROPERTY XH SOME: 0.0 10,200.0 0.0 10,200.0 0.0 0.0 3 0.0 .0,200.0 hardcover PECENTAOE:0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% ZONE #2 (79' to 25' froR lakaahora) - 25% ground oovar pamittad. Houaa t Garagai Orlvaaayi Sidavalk: stapa: Patio Araaat Daok: Rat&^ning walla: Landaoapa Araaa: 2.930.0 815.0 1.755.0 153.0 39.0 300.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.930.0 951.0 2.590.0 228.0 12.0 547.2 231.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 (118.0) (584.0) (31.0) 21.0 (IT? 2) (i4.») 238.0 410.0 2#930.0 833.0 2,028.0 199.0 33.0 438.0 208.0 238.0 410.0 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE: total property in ZONE: 5,919.0 23,800.0 7,488.1 23,800.0 (179.1) 0 7,309.0 23,800.0 hardcover PECENTAOE:25.2%31.5%-0.8%30.7% ••Raviaad hardcovar Incraaaa - Alao raquiraa Conditional Uaa 1,320.0 Pamit for or 5.5%*« 300 - 400 ou.yda. Of fill. Zona #3 (250' to 500' or atraat) - 30% ground covar paraitaad. Oaraga: Drivavay: 615.0 1,050.0 615.0 1,188.0 u.o 0.0 615.0 1,188.0 total HARDCOVER IN ZONE: total property in ZONE: 1.665.0 5.300.0 1.803.0 5.300.0 0.0 0.0 1.803.0 5.300.0 i 0 hardcover PECENTAOE:31.*%34.0%0.0%34.0% **Raviaad hardcovar incraaaa -138.0 or 2.6%** HARDCOVER CALCULATIONJfORKSHEET SETBACK zone : (ct^CLi ONE)te>5-250' 250-500' 5CC.1CC0' 1^(oposc?ci Q A. H ouse B. Garaqe c. Drivwy D. Sidewalk E. Eatio / Deck f.Uhoscare areas SHEETING G. Other S.F. LENGTH WIDTH _ X . S.F. UNDERLAIN \ BY • —^ PLASTIC \ S.F — X - Total Hardcover in Zone S.F Total Property Area in Zone IQ. goo S.F. 3 0 -O- -j-IT) X 100 I KAR5C0VES CALCULATION WOnKSH^ setback iohe : (circle one ) C-75' 250-500 H ardcovir tw ZCNS p^\cir\ O" “ A. H ouse length ‘-CL X 5oc-:oco' B. Garage c. Driveway D. Sidewalk ^OcVs 5-0 « kS-Cl. UiQ. •»TI0/ DiCK y Lahos W*______________________ UNDERLAIN ^ BY —•— * “ PLASTIC SHEETING _ 6. Other S.F S.F. 33 S.F. S.F ag^- S.F. - *•»• S.Es __ S.F • L _ '7. 309_s.f* [aTotal H ardcover in Zone - —^ Total Property A rea in Zone - -p?,^oo s.f. ^ X 100 - —SfitlZ— • • *i . • hi.B HARDCOVER CALCULATiCS HORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (ClflCLl cne ) 0-75' 73-250 ^0^00^5 Ha RDCO v ES IN ZONE \o Ov ^ " OO-ICCO' ^ - A. H ouse length mioth S.R. S.R. S.F. 3.R. S.P. i. 6a M6I , S*^’S nafvrwiy , 3S,3_la vs S.P. a OSO. I.F. y • S.P. * ft <rn«yAi K y a S.P. . S.P. t a S.F. I. *AT10/Occx S.P. • m 1 •a S • F1 AREAS UNDERLAIN av y -S.P. PLASTIC • SHEETINC a S • Fa ^ S.F. Oruva y S.P. Total H ardcover in Zone i6oS__ S.P. [T] Total Property Area in Zone - —SOCl. LL m i'^o3 i p ] OO X • •• inn. OO-ICCO' % ll I -__2^/1^ I ■ • ■ ^ ■ ■ T| 3 0z m p I < ls-V ^I < ^ >1 i IZj' rA \ ____i ftsiTir# !■& rnmm i'iwy> r.; r i v>:ifrfMii :• •“ 1 » -4 ^ [ ■ ‘ ^ ^'' ^?0H| . --------Sl’t ' 1 ( I > ' ■■ •. ~‘l*ys ks«-J t j> r i i4. > M nctfsa. t' V •C Sill ifS»ls mmm ^ V'll^ msm' i-r rn i li’ ■ ' ' ' 'r .■‘ '“'!?m'li. -:.U L-j™.'.,ifiiaiiiL.LLi „u. • 1% '^p y SBi^ * ‘•-•^. 'v» «l <1 • » I ’ '';.'i’:4V,#u;' 'ii''.vri:thU*'!ai ill'.’4.j_l_4-J —,; "■■■''ppl! ■ . '-1 j' • ^ '•' ! ,J »»'. * ■• ' I-■*].■•■-’.t’l111 I .4- ,iiLSSSSfiB s, .ai m..mrU « . / «a°^n ?\ I ^??4ull{/» fi ll 0 ^ ,v, S < .I ' p.k C ^ ^ i • ' r» ^ 1 * » * r*i ^ k.‘- 1 • ' ‘‘ o '•' 9 J-/. ' I u •^i " 5 i1 J A CIVY OF ORCNO - GENERAL I^\ND USE APPLICATION/ Jlj j : } / '- - - - - - - - - - -- - - --. .-4fe'—ft—--.'■PROPERTY LOCATION / J (jSite Address \$6C~ c oA ^<r\ —klLiL-S'r'-1Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) _ _LILz—i I ~7 ~ ^Please attach legal description to application ..f not include^ on required survey Phone home) M7^ *APPLICANT Name ^1^,r^c.T (‘^VrlicL_P hone (work) 3-JEkri; _ City LCj^yAddress i^ r_r-jor\ ONNSR (if different than applicant) N^une Phone (home) Phone _ _ _ __ City _ _ _Address I*^dof^?S?nott;^also*own the'~aij'acenr parcels of land^ Zip (month/year) FBBS - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application $125.00 Residential accessory Use $175.00 Institutional (church# school# etc.) $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use X' $200.00 Land Alteration CITY OF QRCm FIHAHCE OFFICE 1550200000 01 GEH 200, C CHECK 7L 200,C liECEIPr-THAm YOU H2565S0 coot POl T15 10/25 Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ^ Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more i,jceshoreGrading# seawall, retaining walls within 75 of lakeshore PrD/PID - see fee schedule Renewal Fee - SIOO.OO (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Pee - oouble Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS $200.00 - - - - $250.00 - - - - $175.00 ' $ 75.00 - - - - $300.00 $300.00 - - - - $100.00 Other Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) Vacation Easement Vacation Easement Vacation With Subdivision Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Appeals chedule- see fee sc, •1V, V ’ A_S33^ 1 _Cal^ zip I ration CITY OF DRm FIHAHCE (^FICE 35020000001 CSi 200.C HECK Ti 200, C imiPT-rnm you 256550 cool m Til 10/22 floodplain of lakeshore on) It fees) PRESENT USE OF PROPERTYPresent Zoning DistrictPresent Use of PropertyDESCRIPTION OP REQUEST ResidentialOther (specify)Describe request in detail: -f or- V_>—r c ia -a ^ 1________________________300 - ^oo a c,*' cxT':V~ r> (( Q:(lUIRED SUBMITTALSCompleted Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owne s within 350' (you can obta this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Governme Center 348-3271). Plat Map. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if lane alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. TOO ARB REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPT Ml* X 17* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:__________________________________ Date________________ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required ot requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the ybest of J^s/her Icnowledge, Applicant's signature Date /r /:0/ /9.7 OWNERS SIGNATURE v The owner hereby acJcnowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants# agents, commission members, Council members for purposes of investigation and^'uhis request. owner's signature _____________’=^1.../.^///!?.______ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please ma)ce arrangements to have ar authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building S Zoninc Office of this change prior t the meeting. /- I GROUND WORKS company Specialized Landscape Care A-m * i \\/ ^fTB' 12- T2-<.Afv4—eY-pp I)Uovs/^Bl- u«rr^ ^oK'Z.Se A-S t S €)x» I o VB VYAT^TZ- AM'D /W ^erftvy Nl TMci- WA-UCS- -AfsiO /^i^fTuRAl /«rKX> :pi LTCT2-. "-T ^m.M-o*t=i=* n“o Li©VS/B^u,. Ljc TT i*\y<s 5:^ pA-lzrO^K-Ui-V <^‘H-ArKlNe“L.'B:r> , ( -OT^ (S^^43-v|0 — rSVjeTE& tirn— T'€>T»=^Er^COMr>ULTAIK:)N DESIGN INSTALCAI iON •K’2'' ir» iitl Sirc«-t West • Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372 • Phone: (612) 440-4114 Bonestroo Rosene AnderllkA Associates Oltu G BbnfMfDO PE 9oOfTt W Ooitnc PE • C Anopfut pe l PE 6 R Coo* Ror*^ G PE jowjn M Etx^ C •ir^o» Cc»^vuiU^ Engineers & Architects *«ri A Gonaor **E Rooen R pC Rx^'jra A PE D^<J C LwHfc*:.^ P£ R d C^ C A * ^ Bounjon PE Vtjf* A Munson P£ M<^ae» ^ Rjutmjnr PE >0 * PE ^•xynas R Anomon A i * Donjta C BurgjAS PE T>omas E A-igui P£ •smjr PE P Cju PE M R»t'<j a C p ^ Awe ’vy' pe Vc*>^C PE R PE D PE Kenneth P Ande'Kjn P£ Maf« R «o<n PE Wjrt A Se-0 PE a NAone^ PE Oanie' J Eogenon »£ Ojryf K Airvhenman P£ P»«0 J CatvM^ PE J A^&v Pfc Mties 3 PE L Phi*ho C'ewet R PE •Uien c U PE r *'• T**! PE E "boo Pcue P£ Wh R v*oo P£ tihewn 0 C^uSUhon i Cec o Qiver P£ Chjnei A E'<k«y' teo M P^^tiky Hjnjn M 0*»n j*mei E Enge<h«ai November 4, 1992 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 I^OV 5 1902: f^l786 OmUe CUP Our File 139-1787 Dear Jeanne: We have reviewed the survey of the Omlie property on Lots 27 and 28 in the Shadywood subdivision. The site is located on Shadywood Road (County Road No. 29 & 51) along the west shoreline of Crystal Bay. Toe survey shows the proposed circular driveway and two- tier retaining wall. We have only general ''ngincering comments that pertain to the improvements. An inspection should be made at the time of construction to verify the driveway grades and drainage conform to the plan. 'fhe retaining wall appears to be adequate but a detail of the wall design should be provided for our review. The improvements do not significantly impact or alter the drainage in the j»rea. Plea'^e contact tuis office if you have ary questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. SDG:llc 2335 West Hlghw^ 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 61 2-636-46C0 3 ^ 0> > Q. Cl cr »T) *< n = 1 *o r* X > V O f>0 a> o n n s >3 II -*r+ r+ (T) fD1 3 Ca > 00 Q» o cr» — XD O ri- rt Ql »—*• <-► 3 rt -t| ^ V zr Ql 3^ fo ci 0) 0) • .N t W« %that this is North 15 fei Lot 28. a ll reon. It doe:»a true and co et, said 15 fe in Shadywood, s not purport•r-i* Ql jO D O 3 r-»“ CL a> in Cjr n • f or O 3 »- c 0) 3 n iO (D o *o r<- O 3 3 O 0) fD ro Ql Ql V) n in CD r- m o 2 O —• C 3 *-« O D CH* 3 3 (D Ql O 3 O Ql O O c:i r+n 3 0IQ •— Cl X-”T|O 3> Di OZ3 O ►—4 < <3 3r- ro 3 cr 2:(D Ql Ql rD •3 --------SO;d fio CD ^ . 0> VI •3 to*• n CD rt 0) zr Ql ©o o O i/) X <3 r 6" ^ - r- -h CT 3 Oi -h 0) 3 3 (!) O. 3 (O in O tn rf C Qi 3 o n < I'D *•< o *n O O• • vT» ro O 'V cr^ O •fis* <Ji li pLANT?N<5^ A 4 T^creit_ ItiM.•S8?' 3-^ ^ WA(^ Pu^4«JT>KJfiJS pi’uTWt /Vnr»<»to-ii^.f Ks»i -'5-** Hi* i?i.o6i6 WAu». 0>|2ASS 1^6 f A ; R-vveWAV S lope ProB?sE1> "Piemi'N I'fsl\/\Aix<s <1-RC>SS S&crr'i oNi s 1-1 h* r3i.oat i- suope l<^' v/Au-s ^:rri<5>NiS ^‘Rwo LAWNV i&uo6K> toAuu T»5 VAtc ^1^ASS PRoPiJ'SBD ‘R bt^'nt /k^ VA oS (£<i5T"/ 5 W S ^ -7 ' iLl Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator Prom: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator m December 3, 1992 /V>w ^ / ^ Subject: #1775 Robert G. Luesse, 3249 Casco Circle - Variances - Resolution %o Perti«cnt Ordinances - Review Pinal Plan» Exhibit N Section 10.03^ Subd. 14 (D), Oversized Accessory Structure proposed at 1,185 s.f. subject to oversized accessory structure setbacks. A.Street setback required Existing = 47' Proposed = 23' Variance = 7' or 23.3% B.Side street setback required Existing = 3' Proposed = 3' Variance =27' or 90% Sei ion 10.3, Subd. 9 (C) (2), Variance to allowed area for oversized accessory structure. Total area of property at “ 15,890 s.f. Allowed = 1,000 s.f. Proposed = 1,185 s.f. Proposed per Planning Commission recommendation = 1,137 s.f. (6'x8' greenhouse not. approved) Variance = 137 s.f. or 13.7% Section 10.3, Subd. 14 (C), Lot Coverage. Total lot area = 15,893 s.f. Allowed = 2,384 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1,858 s.f. or 11.6% P^-oposed = 2,516.5 s.f. or 15,8% (original proposal, October Planning Commission meeting = 3,344 s.f. or 21%) Proposed per Planning Commission recommendation = 2,468.5 s.f. or 15.5% (6'x8' greenhouse not approved) Variance = 84.5 s.f. or .5% Section 10.22, Subd. 1, Average lakeshore setback required for proposed lakeside addition to existing residence that encroaches into average lakeshore setback by approximately 15'. • i Zoning File #1775 December 3, 1992 Page 2 Section 10.22, Subd. 2, Rev*ew of hardcover facts. A.0-75’ setback « 4,125 s.f. Existing = 842 s.f. or 20.4% B.75-250' setback area = 11,200 s.f. Allowed « 2,800 s.f. or 25% Existing « 2,940 s.f. or 26.25% Amended proposal * 3,298 s.f. or 29.4% (original proposal, October Planning Commission meeting, 4,164 s.f. or 37.2%) Proposed per Planning Commission = 3,250 s.f. or 29%* C.250-500* setback area = 568 s.f. Existing = 184 s.f. or 32.4% Proposed « 184 s.f. or 32.4% *6'x8' greenhouse not approved List of Exhibits A - Application Al- Applicant's Addendum B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List Dl- Amended Proposal D2- Original Proposal E - Adjacent Property Owners Acknowledgment Forms F - Neighbors Approval Letters G - Original Survey H - Hardcover Key Map I - 0-75' Hardcover Fact Sheets J - 75-250' Hardcover Fact Sheets K - 250-500' Hardcover Fact Sheets L - Floor Plans M - Elevations N - Pinal Revised Plan Review of Application The Planning Commission reviewed Mr. Luesse's variance application at both the October and November meetings. The original plan. Exhibit D- 2, was rejected by the Planning Commission based on the number and magnitude of variances required. The original plan proposed a 32'x22* detached garage, a major addition to the lakeshore side of the principal structure and a 8'xlC greenhouse addition to the existing detached workshop structure. A significant concern for the Planning Commission with the original proposal was that the detached garage would block emergency fire vehicles from getting to the principal structure. Applicant was advised to reduce hardcover and structural intensification. Applicant was also encouraged to attach garage addition to the existing accessory structure. Zoning File #1775 December 3, 1992 Page 3 The amended plan submitted for the Planning Commission's November meeting reflected major reductions in structural coverage and hardcover. (D-1) The lakeside two story addition was reduced from 15'x36' to 15'xl6 1/2', the greenhouse addition was reduced from 8'xlO' to 6'x8' and the garage proposed now as a 28'x22' addition to the workshop providing an„open—Corri-dcr-4e^r—eary—access to the principaT'structure. The greenhouse and garage additions to be attached to the workshop creates an oversized accessory structure at 1,273 s.f. requiring the most restrictive of setbacks for the detached structure. The property is 15,890 s.f. in area and is allowed an oversized accessory structure at 1,000 s.f. Lot coverage was reduced from 21% to 15.8%. Hardcover within the 75-250' setback area has been reduced from 37.2% to 31.6%. Mr. Luesse's neighbor to the immediate north, the Diegres, have provided a letter approving the amended proposal. (Exhibit F) Diegres had major objections to Mr. Luesse's original improvement proposal. Hardship Statement Please review Exhibit A-1. He notes the structures within the steep lakeshore bank area have prevented erosion. He notes that the lakeside bank was not damaged during the severe storms of 1987. As for hardcover the applicant reminds us that the undeveloped property was severely sloped with drainage going directly into the lake. Throughout the years of his occupancy, he has created flat plateau areas and notes that he has never used plastic or geotechnic fabric beneath his gardens or formal plantings. Planning Commission Recommendation Although the Planning Commission appreciated the major reductions in structural and hardcover improvements, the Planning Commission's recommendation approved a 24'x22' garage addition to the workshop structure and the 15'xl6.5' two story lakeside addition and denied the 6'x8' greenhouse addition to the workshop. Approval was subject to applicant removing the grade level deck at the north side of the principal structure (204 s.f.). Applicant was to be allowed an entry structure to the existing patio doors. Review of Pinal Plan, Exhibit N Based on the Planning Commission's recommendation, Mr. Luesse has submitted a revised plan showing a 24'x22' addition to the workshop and the removal of the grade level deck and replacing the grade level deck with a 4'xl2' (48 s.f.) entry deck. The factual findings noted above reflect improvements shown in final plan. Note applicant still requests a 6'x8 ’ greenhouse addition. iv’.iKKii,, I Zoning File #1775 December 3, 1992 Page 4 Options of Action To approve application as amended by Planning f'ommission approving the two story 16 l/2'xl5' lakeside addition and 24'x22' addition to detached workshop subject to the findings and conditions of the approval resolution enclosed in your packet; or Approval of applicant’s request that would also allow a 6'x8' addition to workshop structure; or Other. ?oiranission approving the id 24'x22* addition to and conditions of the ;o allow a 6'x8' addition A RESOLOTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (C-2), SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (D), SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C), SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2 PILE #1775 WHEREAS, Robert G. Luesse (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 3249 Casco Circle within the City of Orono (hereinafter ‘‘City") and legally described as follows: Lot 12, Spring Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for the following variances to the Municipal Zoning Code to permit a 22'x24' addition to a detached accessory structure and a two story 15'xl6 1/2' addition to the lakeside of the existing residence as follows: 1. Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (D) - setback variances for oversized accessory structure. Street setback is proposed at 23' instead of the required 30' and 3' from the side lot line where 30' is required. 2. Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C-2) - variance to allowed area for an oversized accessory structure. The applicant proposes a 1,137 s.f. accessory structure where only a 1,000 s.f. structure is allowed. Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - proposed structural improvements will require a lot coverage variance. Applicant proposes 2,468.5 s.f. or 15.5% where only 2,384 s.f. or 15% structural coverage is allowed. 4. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 - an average lakeshore setback variance is required for a lakeside addition that will encroach approximately 15' in front of average lakeshore setback line. 3. Page 1 of 5 5.Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - hardcover variance within the 75-250' setback area is required as hardcover is proposed at 3,250 s.f. or 29% where only 2,800 s.f. or 25% is allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, 1. 2. 3. 4. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1775. The property is located in the LR-IC Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a 1/2 acre or 21,780 s.f. in area. The property consists of approximately 15,893 s.f. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 19, 1992 and November 16, 1992 and recommended approval of the proposed variances as amended based upon the following findings: a)The proposed garage addition to the accessory structure shall not encroach further into the side yard than the existing structure at 3'. b) c) There is no adjacent land available to acquire. The location of the garage structure in the street yard, proposed 23' from street lot line, is consistent with other detached garages within immediate Casco Circle neighborhood. The two story lakeside addition will be placed 5' closer to the lake than an existing screened porch structure. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to Page 2 of 5 ] i preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to the Municipal Zoning Code Sections noted above that would permit the construction of a 24x22' garage addition to detached accessory structure referenced as workshop and a two story 15'xl6 1/2' lakeside addition to the principal residence, subject to the following conditions; 1. Upon application for a building permit, applicant shall provide an updated survey locating all existing structures and proposed structures on property. 2. Applicant shall remove an 8 l/2'x24' grade level deck to the north side of the principal structure and replace with a 4'xl2' grade level deck. All new construction shall be subject to requirements of uniform building code and fire code. The new roof to be installed over workshop/garage structure shall be constructed so as not to exceed a 4 1/2 to 12 pitch . 5. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (December 14, 1993). 3. 4. Page 3 of 5 L 6.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 7.The undersigned <ipplicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the teT?as of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heir«i, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 14th day of December, 1992. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OP MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of December, 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ day of_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _199_, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 5 CITY OF ORONO - VARIAHCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 324 9 CA^CO CIKcce Property Identif. Number fP.i.D.l 38 Z-O-H7-l-Z 43 OOOB Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. l,ot jz FARK Date Property Acquired SOMf*oc.Tz. (month/year) I (do)(do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property? X residential ^^^__other(specify) Zoning District; L-R~tc APPLZCAMT Name Address . 3Z4*7 CA^CO C/e.Cl£ City; Phone (home) ¥7/ Phone (work) (a73 • ____ Zip; 3 9i OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address:City;Zip: DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $, Describe request in detail; A/£cv Z cArt 6 >AZ.Aet£. — /Vd?u4 ^4>€>A — Tc> UDo^K-^Hor^ - £xPAA//> T^e.cff ~ A ^eASoH ~ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width X. Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback X Front X Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) BARDSHIP/DBSCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual proper. conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements;--------- 5,TeCP S4.<2>P£ Re.OU/K£$ STROCTUR£ 7<g /<e^£5» LAK£ ~FRg»c/vr XMVKo\je.r^B. P/itoe. to *^erBAck. 4. No LANn A(/AILA^L£. Te? A'P PL. rANC£^ ^ i77'? /!-Z ff(attach additional sheets if necessary) required SOBMITTALS ^ 1 • of the follovinq information must be submitted by the—app lx cation deadl-t"*» rlate in order for yonr application to be considered ccmplete£_ 1. X Completed Application Form 2. X Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. X Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to^include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8%"xll" for reproduction). 5. VATopographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8h"xll"). ^ 6. X Sicetches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8%"xll ). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. __^Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that voor variance application is not complete if—the—abo^ information has not been included. APPLICAHT'S SIGNATORB The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date 7-, OfOIERS SIGHATORE ^ The owner hereby acJcowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga ­ tion and verification of this request. f?<rt<AA' A ■Owner's Signature ____ Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on tne third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Cceimission and Council- If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. L c r. JlIZI UaLii.u Amendment to ... ^ - ----- Variance Application #1775 Kxnxr 'a '•"rap R G. Luesse - 3249 Casco Circle, Orono wOV 3 -LJwc: Lakeshore Zone Q - 75 ’ This lakefront has a very steep slope to the water's edge. Access to the lake requires a continuous stair to a landing at the water’s edge which serves as dock storage in winter. About one-fourth of the way down the hill (hidden from neighbors' houses and lake shore) we have an open deck that is our only usable lakefront. This deck and the stair are elevated enough to permit plant growth beneath. All construction is surface supported. This avoids disturbing the soil that might trigger erosion. The entire steep slope has been treated to prevent erosion. A series of timber and/or field stone retaining walls hold the hill in place. I continue to experiment with plantings that will grow in the shade, have aggressive root systems and serve to slow down the runoff. Our efforts have been very effective. We haven't had any visible erosion in the 38 years we've lived here. Properties immediately adjacent on both sides have each had two major mud slides during that period where large segments of their hillside slid into the water. The next properties adjacent to those have each had one mud slide in that period - washing out stairs and covering the beach area with mud. All of the properties along this frontage of the bay, except ours, have an earth shelf at the lake shore, created by the material that was cleaned up from the beach following mud slides. Because we have protected against erosion we have no usable yard area at the lake. As a result of this unusual circumstance we find that our structural solutions are essential for reasonable use of the lake shore. Btiildable Zone - 75' to 250 ’ The hard cover on this area is already substantial. This circumstance has been mitigated substantially by the way the property has been graded. Starting at the top of the steep slope near the lake, the lot continues to rise another 15 feet to the street (Casco Circle). Before we built this was a continuous slope toward the southeast. By judicious grading, I have established three separate and nearly flat plateaus which are mostly lawn and plantings. This retards the fast runoff that would otherwise occur. In addition, I am a proponent of organic gardening. I haven’t applied fertilizer or weed killer to my lawn and garden for years. Instead, I use composted yard and garden refuse and sphagnum peatmoss to condition the soil and hand labor to control the weeds. I do not use plastic 1 .1^ sheeting or fabric for weed control in my landscaping. I am making a concerted effort to protect the lake and to enhance the environment. In response to the Commission's concern about hard cover, I have reduced the size of the addition to our residence from 382.5 sq. ft. to 82.5 sq. ft. ai^d reduced the greenhouse addition from 80 sq. ft. to 48 sq. ft. We have also reduced the garage from 3 stalls to 2 stalls and moved the location of the garage from the south side of the lot to the north side where it will be attached to the workshop. This provides for direct access from the street and reduces the amount of hard cover on the unimproved right-of-way. It also has the added advantage of not obstructing fire access to the house should the need arise. Workshop In my original application I proposed a second story addition to the workshop. At the request of my immediate neighbor to the north (Mr. Diegre), I have removed that from my application. Attached is a letter from Mr. Diegre stating that he has no objections to my amended application including the new roof for the workshop providing the pitch does not exceed 4 1/2 to 12. I have provided drawings of the proposed new roof at 4 1/2 - 12 pitch to Mr. Diegre and enclose same with this applicatioa I have also enclosed drawings of the other improvements proposed as well as letters of approval from other adjacent neighbors. We request that you approve our application as amended herein. Sincerely, - I \ ^ \ Vt f. _r .7!TI / K58 20-117-25 42 005105486 IVY PL L> L HIUIREN S S BUY L MULIREN 5486 IVY PL HAY2ATA EtN 5554158 20-117-25 45 000805249 CASCO CIR R G LUCSSE ETAL ROBERT LUESSE CASCO POINT RD HAYZATA Mil 55591 MILLIREN58 20-117-^ 45 001505255 CA^O CIR 0 M SPILSWH^A P 0 SPILSETH DAVID M ^ILSr 5255 CASCO CIRCLE HAYZATA »tl 55591 33 20-117-23 42 0015 3271 CASCO CIR PATRICK J NEUVILLE PATRICK J NEUVILLE 3271 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INEORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OIA4ERS LIST58 20-117-25 45 000605466 IVY PL E F GARNER ETAL E F GARNER 5466 IVY PL HAYZATA MN 5559158 20-117-25-45 000905247 CASCO CIR KURT CARLSON A NIFE KURT A LUCILLE CARLSON 3247 CASCO CIR HAYZATA Itl 5559100058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEOTHE CASCO COTHE CASCO COMPANYROBERT 0 MACNIE5155 CASCO CIRWAYZATA IW 55391 REPORT NO. PI455401 PAGE 805251 CASCO CIR JOHN R DIEGRE ETAL JOHN R DIEGRE 5251 CASCO CIR WAYZATA TW 55591 REPORT PI<«55‘i01 PAGE e•117-25 0007CASCO CIR OlEGRE ETAL DIEGRE ISCO CIR I IW 55391117-23 43 0010 CASCO CIR RICHARDS S HIFE RICHARDS SCO CIRCLE H»4 55391 u //J 2?1 S S *7 « %i ^ r* HO( T 14 . - -- ... - -cj'-r-n djsc S * Q * f H -I r* y4^ r^i>- r_AMia09t:JyfiL^ I (we) Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form [print name(s)] VN-<Le (print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No. _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. I (we) [print ncune(s)][print address] the proposed improvement or proposed use of the also referred to as Land Use have reviewed the plans for property located at _ _ _ _ Application No. _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare-approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's use requires Council approval. ; i aV V s y. Property Owner Date ;% I 'LJ Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. I Adjacent Property Owners* Ac)cnowledgement Form I (we) G''r z^l 7 [print name(s) ][print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at 3^*^*7 C-e^c^ ^,Ve/’^also referred to as Land Use Application No. _____. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use I (we) Adjacent Property (print name(s)] G' AcJcnowledgement Form of 'bt^u Ti'^l 1* [print address] j^gYiewed the plans for the_ proposed improvement or proposed use o*. the property located at 3^ V f C4it C also referred to as Land Use Application No. _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this ac)cnowledgement, I (we) am (are) not as)ced to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use Date Property Owne 9 - .:> 3 - ^ Date I (we) 1//<L [print name(s)] of .9^7/ [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed imprc^vement or proposed use of the property located at .9^^ ^Iso referred to as Land Use Application No. _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this ac)cnowledgement, I (we) am (are) not as)ced to declare~approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. J J Prooertv Ownera. a* Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. Adjacent Property Owners’ Acknowledgement Form X'(we) r\. UAf^e\M^^kWc:1<^^ Ai?h<^ or __lAS..C?? U,i£»____ [print name (s)'] [print address] h3V0 r‘0vi6W6d th6 pXsns for th6 proposed iinproveineiit or proposed use of the property located at QP^fs Qj (Z also referred to as Land Use Application Ho. ) 77^ [we) understand that jlt executing this acknowledgement, ^-3r4we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. r’;- L -> r/ { Cl <■* 2^ t t • " ^\fv C’lj-too .^ssif-'i- X KUt'c- Mr. r-vc^.-• b= / ,/fl- i. cv: Tc'-t TyC' <^A.r.AA(. .friTfi c^ii: Tc- [s\i I , v' A. -7^- T<4^ i'Cf<^‘'U y fc, -^0- = T 4 ’/. -rc (X t/f X4 'v (V ' . / : //T • ,Uir. CACac C.^cxcr/ ( jiiiiiftr lirfn ^ --inffiiiriri iViii^ iI p'^ ’ CiJi/j' 3ii43 Ca<Kio C<>|. _iS!(v<< (C^. 4^ )9q-2. ••• . ^ •1775 I .3i44 Co'o^ Gv>^• iU-o 'Vif Lk>C)dkiMJ A-~ Qli L>Jj2, ji-»A^2o<va^-^poj2i2<)L4vU2<^ iU< •JvX pAO ’jQj^am Pi 4«* * ■ !, , ■■ 'f. " ♦ • - t e / 'L o yfv y -^ ' ^ ‘ i'yi^:/(. r^/ii- • t. 'yir-t/ . / 7^y yT/w^' ''>1^ />* /^'i <iO<y •3-s^ y'7 6!Jl\.c^ BiUkaauMuu.ilallhJM .MMl MM I ^:p«u1 < ARLEIGH C. SMITH lOU W^fmm 9mtla^4 PLAT OF SUBVET orwto rmi or --------IL ,Ct. U^cnsfL Xt-X. -----------L^a:—iu gAa>A 1 lAdL ctMTtncAn or locatim or iuxuuio 1 hortbv ctrufy that on ?*liLPf ■ H «fV 4 I fiiA^o a turvoy of iho propoaoi teooiian •< tbo tuiMiBg on Iha abovt doaenna4 ptopa rty and tlut tha loeatioa ol laid buildiag la corraetly liiown m Om aboro pUL cnmncATt or luarir I liartby mttfy tliat on. ........ li— I ayrvoyad fba ptoporty doacriM abaaa and tiwt Um abaa« plat la a papfaaaatatian al aaid anmy* ’ ' .1 ■ I *• r a y / / H I C ^ •*? ^ M'i «’!>&X ilk B 3rp:i eOA -9S3 •do 'f%mv 1 OO -J ' JI X iu K • 1iNO*2 ,OS? <,SL dO 'i'XidY r^5 %t\^i r ftS X$Si.• *aNc:z,i^-c •i'^. \fn^v r HARDCO'/£?, CALCULAncri XORKSHirT ScT3AC:< ZONE: (CISCLE cne) (C**^ 75-250' Existing Harocoves in Zone W-/776 - ^jf/5r/ v<» 250-500' 5C0-iCC0' A. House B. Garage c. Driveway 0. Sidewalk ©To LAke © E.-Patio/ ‘ Deck F. LandscapeAREAS UNDERLAIN ■VPLASTIC SHEETING /-AHO^CAFC ntF9€K‘i PC^ C^H-TeCc ^ G. Other , LENGTH 33,5 “ / 3.0 Z^.O 311 width . 15 Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone 5rx 75* /2<" S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _ S.F. ________S ¥/Z^ s 042 .F. [T .F. [71 s S4Z 7 0 X 100 % <1 K HARDCOVER CALCULATION KCRKSHEE ^ /77f - F£2zsm^. SETBACK ZONE: (CIHCLS ONE) (O-^ 75-250' Existing Harocoveb in Zone 250-500' 5CO-iCCO' A. H ouse LENGTH B. Garage c. D riveway 0. Sidewalk ©MR. To LAKE. 33.5* /t.O 2.^.0 ^ E. @ D eck /6 p.Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN •V PLASTIC SHEETING Laho ^capc Tiriset F©it EKo ^iom coht ^^ G. Other 3*^2> X X WIDTH ¥. 7S •7.0 .7*9 Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone9S a 7S m rZv /9Z. S.P. S.F. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. /S9 S.F. __ S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. S.P. fiiZ_S.F. U t.f. (T] SV2 TfT| ^ X 100 - % MiHi r-. 5i ■ ■ A MS M9E O ff~ 2' *f2HARDCO'/Er. aLCuLATICN WORKSHEET s£T3Ac;< ZONE: (ciRCL= cne ) 0-75' (7^25^ 250-5C0' 5C0-iC00* Existing Hardcover in Zone ©CHIMS^T A. House _ SJilStiK* POSCH ©WOAK 5«Of Eftrkr© D. Sidewalk ® _ ^ ■STAm.^AC. V-^ R&T. U)ACt- E. PATte/ @ Deck (7^ r*.t. wAii.? F.- snccTiwe-" G. Other 36 LENGTH /^.5- 6 3. Garage ® c. Driveway 8.Z^ to 7 /30 /3 50 24 - Z.O X X Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone 64 X nf z m Z8 344-SiF, WIDTH /£>m •S.fT * S.F. 1f4Y. /e>m 4 0 S.F. « S.F. " S.F. zo m S.F. m 54 S.F. 4 m 4Z8 T.F. /m t30 S.F. 3 3<t .75 m Jd S.F. S.5 zc4- S.F. .75“ 3 /m 7 /4 S.F. m S.F. m • S.F. S.F. 3,0 17 //. 2 OO S • F • s s .F. (T .F. IT] 3077 -rlT X 100 - 27.y % C K'S .1 ^ / 7/ 5 'z D AME^OBDHAHI3C0VER CALCULATION WORKSHEET Ac;< ZONE: (ciacLE ONE) 0-75' (^-250^250-500' 5C0-1C00'S£T3AC;< Existing Hardcover? in Zone © © © © 0 © (IH c^sCY /¥Z A. H ouse Z «* s.r. ••LENGTH WIDTH ■X'V’Sf, ...■-•■f y '‘D ^ ^ S.p. Y©«ttt AVP»T*«h S'__ ^2-^ .... '■■■i-./WKIJ^Ut uJdCK *>Hef 3 .C '' /4T :u ^ 3* 0 s.P. <:rRec.H HOO ^ ^ X ‘- •' '•s.r. 3. Garage - X ^ — 4k c. D riveway /2.5 ^"3 7.5 ’s... E»t»y _ 8 ^ X s.F. 3c 2.7 SI 0. Sidewalk .77 X 4-SC8 s.P. (7^• 't c ©ns. 5 Ac Rer. vU* LL5 dzr ^X •s ©'•1^T 10/ “D eck . / X IXlT. WPUS . zo •f .75' F.iAwaaeAPc 3 /« X 3 / AREAS— URDCRLAHT - X PLASTfe- aimcTiifir X X 6. Other X r>g s.F. ■s.F. S.F. f±___ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. T otal Hardcover in Zone 354 Z s.F. S •F* ^ Total Property Area in Zone GV X nv n.zoo j.F. m H 35*2 //. 2-<5>o X 100 -3 % ra-Mr AI n- --*■■ ■ . .ta m ■ ^r - _ i .ft —~--------. . . . «m ati lin ■ I ' ~ - .vifBknu I* n. n7‘-' HARDCa'/ER CALCULATICri rtCR:<SHEHT ScT3Ac;< 2CNE: (circle one ) 0-75' 75-250' (^0-5C0~^ 5C0-1GQQ* jt^ Existing Hardcover in Zone A. House B. Garage © c. D rivewav ® D. Sidewalk E. Patio/ D eck F. Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN BY , , PLASTIC SHRETING G. Other LENGTH X X WIDTH Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone 7/ Xv G 32. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. l.F. ^ .F. B a] ■:•[?] X 100 3^’^ % ■1 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORK'SHEET ScT? :x ZwNE: (circle one) 0-75' 75-250' Existing Hardcover in Zone 250-500) 500-1000' © A. House .X • m StF. • •length width X m S.P* X S«Ftm •• X StFt X SB S.f. B. Garage _X 8 S.Fi c. Orivemay .7 X J.=t -S.F. X _ _ m S.F. 0. Sidewalk _ _ _ . X _ _ _^I, * ^ ^S.F. X S.F. X S.F.E. Jatio/ Deck X ^Br w V w S.F. F.Landscape X •S.F.AREAS UNDERLAINBY X S.F.PLASTIC SHEETING X • ^ W W W • S.F. X m • S.F. 6. Other - X S.F. • Total Hardcover in Zone /fi+ • S.F. ^ S.F. I bITotal Property Area in Zone SiS 3- r' X 8 /gv ilT] ‘S(,9 X 100 - 32.V % »*■ -V-J •J '1^“’ r ^ * r.-w MfiiAifii flalaii il^iRTtiil i iiaii Tir iin i fTai' i 11 ■ . ■/ N>/ORV<.tHOr 4 GR.E.EHHOOSE. FLOOR PLAN k }i". r iHOivrM s-.. t ■- _, SM-. 1 LiMmr*Roon —^EKPKHOtfr■ J OCT) e>E.wow LUE5St ■R.B.'SlOm.KCE. — E.K6T E-i.tVATlOW fbCAU*. ^ 1* FOUR SRASOM PORCH roRCM if 1 iriiiiiiiiiiiiiiimi|pH HP*.i-' 1 I !I t i GAR^66 west ttEYATlON &CM.C. B Y ^\K%V iiiiiril WORKbVNOf 4 C iK-EENHOU^E 'Lk^J e.Le.VAT\OU \y •* M s.'.- ■■ r TOx Planning Coaaiission Chiar’«an »C«ll«y Orono Planning Comitnssion City Council li M DATS: Jeann« h. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator November 12» 1992 %0 SOBJKTx Pll« 11777 John Thiesse* 3845 Rayside Road - Variancas Public Haaring It PactlMrat OcdiiMiocas Saction H.«3 Subd. 14 (C) (axcaption) - Lot covaraga Allowad Existing Pcoposad Incraasa 1,500 sq ft 1,632 sq ft or 20.5% 1,657 sq ft or 20.0% 25 sq ft or .3% Saction 10.22 Subd. 1, averaga lakashora satback for slight ancroachment by three season porch. Review Exhibit k. Saction 10.22 Subd. 2 75 - 250' satback area ■ 4,424 sq ft Existing ■ 2,230 sq ft or 50.4%* Proposed • 1,997 sq ft or 45% Hardcover reduction ■ 233 sq ft or 5.4%* • Approved Res. #2812 - granting satback ♦ hardcover variance for 2 stall detached garage. Section 10.23 Subd. 6 (B) - Required setbacks - LR - 1 A Zoning District A. Street setback Required -50* Existing garage ■7' Proposed entry •21' Variance m 29' B. North side setback Required m 30' Existing entry step ■7' Proposed m 10' Variance m 20' North side or 58% or 66% * Entry step to be removed? — hardcover facts, floor plan and elevations do not account for entry steps. -- - - . 1 ni« #1777 John Thicsse, 3845 Baysio* Road pag« 2 C. South right side setback Required Elisting Proposed Variance 3i* 18.2’ 18.2* 11.8*or 39.3% List of Isbibits h. kl, B. C. D. E. Application Applicant’s Addendum Plat Map Property Owner's List Elisting Survey Proposed Survey Pl«3 Hardcover Pact Sheets G. Harren Letter 11/2/92 Hl>3 Elevations I. First Floor - Plan J. Second Floor - Plan K. Aerial Map - Average Lakeshore Setback Dsscciptioo of Reqoost The applicant proposes a second story addition over the eiisting 24 X 34* building envelope. A 12* '' 14* three season porch is proposed in the northeast corner o the present lakeside deck area and a two story 5X5* entry addition is proposed to the street side of the existing residence. Refer to Exhibits E» Hl- 3# X and J. Applicant proposes a 5.4% reduction in hardcover by removing approximately 233 sq ft of non-structural hardcover. There is a slight encroachment of the average but because of the curved shoreline there neighbor to south's view of lake. lakeshore setback is no impact on Setback variances are required for the intensifation of the structure where ever a substandard setback is shown. This would include both north and south side yards and street yard. There is no hardcover within the 0-75* setback area. Please refer to Exhibits^ and G, the Harren's letter. It appears the side entry steps are located 7* from the side lot line rather t..an encroaching Outlot A jointly owned by both Harrens and Evans. Outlot A is a riparian access outlot created in the Bayside Landing Plat for shared access for the owners of Lots 1 and 2. Mrs. Harren has advised both staff and the applicant of their concern for the potential liability as joint owner of File §mi John Thies3#r 3345 Bayside Road page 3 fk-' property. Staff haa asked Mr. Thlesse to provide additional survey information to clarify the actual location of the north lot line. At a site inspection staff met with Mr. Thiesse who located the iron Markers shown on survey. Mr. Thiesse advises he is in the process of reviewing the County's records to determine if there is any problem. Applicant has advised that he would be willing to purchase additional land from the owner. Staff has also advised of the limitations on such an acquisition because of the need to maintain specific areas of the property to allow for continued shared use of the riparian outlot. Staff has reviewed the preliminary survey prepared for the Bayside Landing application and note there is no encroachment of the Thiesse steps shown in the Gronberg surveys. Mr. Thiesse has also advised that he will agree that there will be no use or encroachment by builders of the adjacent outlot at the time of construction. The Thiesse residence will soon be served with sewer. A building permit can not be issued for any bedroom expansions until the house is connected to sewer. Stateaent of Hardships Please refer to applicant's addendum and application form Exhibits A and Al. AdditiOMl Deceab«r 4,1992 Plmxminq Commimmiom tioo It was the gansral consensus of the Planning CossBlssion that the proposed laproweMnts appear intense in consideration of the severely substandard property but the project will result in a 5% reduction of hardcover and iaprovMsents will not expand beyond the existing building envelope. The enclosure of the existing open deck area will intensify the existing average lakeshore setback encroachaent but there is no visual isgact on lakeshore views because of the curved shoreline. The Planning CoMisaion recoaaended approval of the application as proposed subject to the residence being connected to sewer when it is aade available. The applicant has advised that it is his intention to connect to the sewer as soon as it is available to his property. Staff has been advised by the Public Works Director that the Thiesse's property is located within the first area to receive sewer and it should be available sosietisMi in January. Staff %fould recoesMind that approval be conditioned on sewer being connected to the property prior to the Building Inspector's final inspection for the proposed structural iwprox UMBts of the existing residence. The enclosed approval resol tion has been drafted per the Planning Coraission's appro' I recooBiendation. lav •iji •I • * '*■ f I B.North side setback. Structure will be intensified at a 10’ setback where a 30* setback is required. C.South right side setback. Structural intensification will take place at the existing 18.2' setback where a 30' setback is required. ■0«» BB IT RBSOLVBD by the City Council of Orono* Minnesota: •IMGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1777. The property is located in the LR-IA# Single Family Lakeshore Residen I Zoning District requiring two acres in acre. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed thi^ application on November 16, 1992, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A.The improvement project will result in a reduction of 5.4% hardcover within th'» 75-250' setback area. B.There is no hardcover within the 0-75' setback area of this severly restricted property. C.The proposed second story addition will not expand beyond the existing building envelope. D.The property is located on '■ /ed shoreline. The proposed structural Intensii ,etlon by the three- season porch will not impact the view of the adjacent residence to the south. 4.The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not advei***?l> affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a tiro haza'- or other danger to neighboring property; wouJd nc merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but" is Page 2 of 5 r 5. necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. COHCLOSIOHS, Oia>BR AMD COHDITI^t.-K Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to the Municipal Zoning Code Sections noted above to permit the construction of a 24' x 34' second story, 5' x 5' new entry addition and lakeside deck with three-season porch, subject to the following conditions; 1. Applicant shall be responsible for connecting residence to municipal sewer prior to the Building Inspector's final inspection for the proposed structural improvements to the existing residence. 2. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exei ^'sed by application for a building permit within o*.e year of the date of "*ouncil approval, or this variance will expire on that date (December 14, 1993). 3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the *^oning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terras of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono* Minnesota at a regular Meting held on the 14th day of Deceoiber* 1992. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson^ Mayor Property 0#ner(s) STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The forego..ng instruMnt was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of Decesiber 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson 6 Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor 6 City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota sninicipal corporation and said instrxiMnt was executed on behalf of the City. Notary s^*'TlTF Page 4 of 5 f STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) S8. COUNTY or HENNEPIN ) On this _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _1 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _ _ _ ___ ___ _ _ _ _ _—__ _ _____ _ _ ,_ _ _ _ _known to me to be the person(s) describe! In and who executedthe foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NaTARY PUBLIC STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) 8S. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _» 199 , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, persona fly appeared kno%m to me to be the person(s) described Fn and who executed the foregoing Instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 o/ 5 CITY OP CRONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application F«e $175.00 ($50.00 p«r «ach additional variance) Fenev'al Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for ncn conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) a 1 .1 1-Vi / /-• 0 ^ e > I ^V:' "* V' W V W ♦ * fc.•• w* * awfc.t Tr * a w V W Ti.r-t f rrw ♦va a I w ■ ^ ~W ^ w »»•* wt^va Mva > « av' a property ihformatioh Site Address /O/l - - - - - -— Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.)^3£—Cs*fV/ 7'i23-j^^ CCC Attach legal description to application if not included on required ^ , Date Property Acquired_ _ _7 - /- - -(menwh/year) I (do)/ao not )J a Iso own the adjacent parcels of j.an . Present use of property: residential other(speci y Zoning District:______L ^ / APPLICABT N2une - Jc J-/N Phene (home) 7 ^ Phone (wor)c ) ^ 7 ^ ~ ^ / C-' City: Zip: ONHER (if different than applicant)Phene (hone) Name Phone (work) Address: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ City:Zip: DESCRIPTIOH OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ /(d c.f- Desc 7^tzt /^'<L VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Vsetback:Front Side r.ear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS rc:cr / (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUPMITTALS A1 1 of the following Inforaatlon nust be aubnlttcd by the application doadllne date in order for yoor applicatl<» to bo considerod coaplete; 1. < Coppleted Application Form 2. X Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150’ (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Gcv^t Center 348-3271). 3. If Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. y Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8H"xll" for reproduction). 5. ___Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy Sij^xll"). 6. y S)cetches or plans of floor t (Elevation vie>^ (provide 1 copy 8>j'*xll"). 7. _As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application, t. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner nust sign this application. Please remember that yoor variaBCC application is not coaplete if the iaforaatioo has not been incloded. APPLICART'S SIGHATORS The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her )cnowledge. Applicant's Signature Date ■* y OHIIBRS SIGHATURB The owner hereby ac)cowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for pui^'oses of investiga ­ tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date yC -92 Applicant must have ail submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Cossaission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building 4 Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. C"Tf rf October 28, 1992 XCT 2 6 CityofOrooo Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 RE: LAND USE APPLICATION NO 1777 Dear City Planners In 19SS, Sherri and 1 had been married for ten years and had no childrra. We purchased a house in Orooo that would satisfactonlv accommodate our lives. Since that time our family has mown. Our second child is due in January The house we live in has a little more than 800 square feet of living area on the mam level Th»s area includes two bedrooms and the only bathroom in me house Our family is very happy where we live, but our house is too small for us Our lot is below present city standards for size, therefore I believe that the only reasonable direction for expansion is up By plying a second storv over the existing house and relocating the entrances, substantial reduction in hardcover can be accomplished. Two areas of the variance request pro^'e intensification of existing hardcover. In both cases, 1 cite "life in Minnesota" as the luudship The first intensification of hardcover is a small entn' over the front step that acts as a combination air-lock to the outside/connecting link from the house to the garag< sm^l entry would keep the north wind of winter out of the main part of the n e. This ouse as doon are opened The second intensification of hardcover is a porch covering half of the existing deck. Tliis porch would allow us to enjoy the summer evenings without being eaten by mosquitoes. The remainder of the proposed expansion is adding another level under the existing roofline. I have discussed this request for variance with my two most immediate neighbors, Ms. Peggy Peterson and Ms Ondy Rowlette. Neither of these neighb 's have objections to my proposal. I thank you for your consideration of my request. Please advise if additional information is needed Sincerely, ■John B. Thiesse i 5r (22) <2*) Ayp' T 2 - (?5) » r-i»‘i "■ <»(29) 26) ^ fl R ”7iTS '^(28) ^ R A “7i5 S 16 P s S R /“Tin •5(27) ¥AC ft.y si y: !( '?) f • TZ t •^'*t > •« •-5C • r>V JUSSl'- $t '4 J t ,_fc. ‘ ^ m . •« '' V If ' *4 ♦35’ ,<r‘«:•^y- S3 5T C 533 ?. <•: ^ _____^ f; ^ 'C5' ^ ?' \—-4 ' • * 1 . "i i .‘.IT'" . ‘ 't ; ^"Tv 4^, L 4? O' I\ ! v^i*} J { 115^ »« • • • 3 u 4 (39 .1 - '5 ( ) 18) I 0 ' « i f tasiog^zgm I I V2l^< ( I n ( ii W' 05 > «• • > ( 13) t 5»e 01 i I ( 14 1-j- f ( 15) e i'C *• ( 16) » 12) ; 17' 'c l 19) w 44* ’I ST OBBS QA'( ) m GATE 10/22/92 HENWEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEMPROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE I38 05-117-23 23 0006 PROP AOOR 3845 BAYS IDE RD OWIER HML J B THIESSE ASA THIESSE TAXPAYER JOHN B & SHERRI A THIESSE NAME/AOOR 3845 BAYSIOE RO LONG ! AKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 23 0007 3855 BAYSIDE RO PEGGY PETERSON PEGGY PETERSON 3855 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 23 0008 3865 BAYSIDE RD OAK DIANIS DAVID DIANIS 579 N E PLANTATION RD STUART FL 349% 1410 N 38 05-117-23 23 0010 PROP AOOR OWNER NAME 0 A K DIANIS TAXPAYER DAVID DIANIS NAME/AOOR 5/9 N E PLANTATION RD #410 N STUART FL 349% 38 05-117-23 23 0034 255 LANDMARK DR A H EVANS A D EVANS AUSTIN H A DIANE EVANS 1405 KINGSVIEW LA PLYMOUTH MN 55447 38 05-117-23 23 0035 A H EVANS A D EVANS AUSTIN H A DIANE EVANS 1405 KINGSVIEW LA PLYMOUTH MN 55447 38 05-117-23 24 0111 PROP AOOR 3775 BAYSIDE RD OWNER NAME G R A CE ROWLETTE TAXPAYER GERALD L ROWLETTE NAME/AOOR 3775 BAYSIOE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 #1 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF DATE 'Wa Anil 38 05-117-23 23 0008 3865 BAYSIDE RD D & K DIANIS DAVID DIANIS 579 N E PLANTATION RD STUART FL 34996 05-117-23 23 0035 A H EVANS & D EVANS AUSTIN H ft DIANE EVANS 1405 KINGSVIEW LA PLYMOUTH MN 55447 ED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE r APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS )F PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE BEST 1^1 AiLA maoni n iC zoc (/) I HARECOVER CALCULATION IVCRKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) Q-75* (^5-250^ 250-500' 5C0-1CG0' Existing Hardcover in Zone A. House /h£C/^ 34 2^^ S.F. W-A LENGTH WIDTH X____3 I l33.S.F. X /4 /^S ^ S.F. C5i - X S.F. X 3. Garage x 24 m S.F. *4SO - S.F. /4 ^8c. Driveway ^ x 20 ss _ 2<fO , • X S3 . S.F. D. Sidewalk 2 x <3 S.F.X11120 ------------ Dooji, 30 ' S.F. er?i//jey X S3 VC ... S.F. £. ^ATIO/ /2 /<^«S -S.F. F. Landscape x m S.F. AREAS UNDERLAIN BY X as S.F. PLASTIC SHEETING X ^ S.F. X _ S.F. G. Other 2 x 0 /2 ^ S.F. Total Hardcover in Zone ✓ /^9 7 S.F. fT" Total Property Area in Zone S.F. B A .. /?97 4 B ■ ^^29 X inn - '% Se£iT yi77?^d//^'Z? S/fC/c: i//* /:?.477^ Vm ^ Jill >1^^. id BAitni || II Ifclfcifc 111 I I I -■• . . . . ^ «. * ■ “ a j *i «• ,r« .— •f -. y ; /»• y _' ^ f .• - •...^. r afc< a.« *i, • . • .1 »« • ^ t ^ . ■»?*'••_ I ;.a6yr_5^A« js^.7^'«so! V -----fl JXJ 7x-iXl>* - . xV'xy • 8iu i.t P*K /!«* .. • ^i£. -.- --------------- H>u . _» y* ..— ,» , ^»j«T UOt .y^4o^.')_ • uo • • •• » ^ --------------------y^’Wfrl') _• ixo —----------—------------_________________• ISO ------------------------------^••~) _► ftO . . »^c.______ •■ It . —__________ (W«/J’4'>.(.,>fc/,'i . 27t .ifji ay __-e/e.5f /or: i&tAtM JOirjy . * yao pecit^U A 49 • 3jC i^ii.• V8 ZpU * It Cooc •—•MTi^rrc y^ii. c»'^» 8* • 70 .r >* j 5 6^)• /VO ^W#UlA^___• iVO • . •.2i30 ,< Hr? »t .llV/tHis s-H*j vC K^JLt\Tio0^k%^ I , ® At>v4ur«^T to S. lift9 TI19 t><JWfiu4y i^BMlu 4n.cm»* UiMK4,S TD 49 ‘toT'^iu-V /A«M4irk ^ Aienr 7>*^ ^ ^**^*-*^ *f. /i^Atoc«v«9. /*.4 ^•s^mrx 3X •/• . ____ _ - , ■ . :• 77Zi^CZ T *rt~ • «- i:w.’ ^ ’-^*-V <r~i«* 4.n »-t <«• .•,r* .— •f '♦« m* V.'••'"*♦• . -f ••■• •-• - f; •f • -' ■/%i»f I' nn a«.» -• JlaiL 2f»>*(C. 7X'*fb' .. ^ t ^ nnvptu ;. — —-------- *•»«*»• . • aiu ».t P«Ht ___ • »iC. .. . -------------------- H>fl ... _» ‘f* ____!. i»o __________?■/'»'<(-•'>___• i»« -_____________________• r<o __________^***(^.*T^ . * fro »*C._____•■ I*. - - • • •mm ..^4 *.• «» •• *. ;. ^- . --------.r —•• w \ **P! Z»h« '.flcar^tr^ •,_ . .. —-•■ - . _ .. syi* iy -M. >rr J4UM)_•yjo prcjL • nc •9 f ft • v» 2 j >U • »» CMC. a.«Mtl.^VTC y.jtu'i * •» > .■/y'c- 'i * i»• Jlrlfc </<)• /Vb t4MW#Ul^____• iVO «9rj *£ 2230 ,A ^ta^-rrawAt. i _ • irXc^S fAdiLWCx Atkk^MKiT *r» A. TW 4Uj »^ UiHKtM lO CIS 'n>T4M>y wineipJ ^ A^onr 7W4r ips»%«44.^ <4ct>» ;4A«Mir /tP «f. Ai^wTItva^ 3.^ Vl . _ ; 5>,-.- V * *. ‘V .. • #• .. •••<.. -••._ a, .** .V!. !i** 1^1 't ’ygf /'•>*«*<• I ' '. • «. a^«#« •.,»■ .• r. ^ •• > .; \ ,K • ll'ii.,'j 'O’-^ItrM VI qa /ium^ 'MV 9 5sse ^ • \foj\XOLrv^UU OX 'b^^S j CVCUXa <uJU. U ^ CO' HUK \XAl IP>X cuvJi tT> tM ^ iJa ~3iut^iaa. ^jpuJ^. L vui. Qusy\ tkt IOaJL U/miM Aide Lmai. h> (jUit iJu JLOkjl t-6 rJio. OfiitCil^O ]J0l ^^y^jXr to /ude jUdC uiMir , U/t f\) t>VY*/r¥>J^ 'XkaX „^X»jl (iaj U ~\goiyhJXL' i^ iTuXL, umL 'T<a it JbhjL od^do^ ^ liiUUX AtXhact- ^^Se. //xAA*^^'— /)„ ’ 105 et- \JkU4AJL- 0^^ 'm6 J-(^. yj^aUocM^ —^ ^ tj-v- . ■ ■ >1.'. r ) c-5 C-. >) < i / H * u iD£ -iry^Aj 'i: tv ’'>• % /' ^ i # I / 11»U tl ^T- J .V31 >] mMm *'v^ ;*^ •'*il1:^'!'T i** '. • L.IT* ►3w iH^i • » .• :K. gSf,3S^ r:s^-'V 5i* • '. ♦ :■♦ *’V prr', .-i .4^ - .iiw r?W; . i .^■' .' i' m w\'T 7l^ «" ■S|W4i^ ‘'1?5£^' V - A? r-V'- :■-, ... •? - * • •■ _ f ^. ' 34 .~ •.‘i- /. Z* * ’ ‘ '.*r'-• 1; ■,. .^' -♦r • ^ • • ’.» • * ■ ■ '.- - ' • .: ■ /. • ‘ t i m ^::cilB5S3 I To; Orono City Council Members DEC 1 4 1992 DecGUl^QlF From: Lee and Julie Harren DEC 1 0 Re: Variance application for Thiessc at 3845 Bayaide Rd« of theWe co-own the property adjacent and to t!ie East Thiesse property. The Thiesse's are applying for a side lot variance and a hard cover variance in order to add a second story to their residence. In 1990, they were already granted sev'eral variances to build a two stall garage on their 8,000 square foot lot. One of the reasons they were granted the variances is that . there is no additional land available to bo purchased,...** ( see attached City Council Resolution >2812 ) Th- hoxjse is constructed within 10 feet of the East lot line. The steps and the sidewalk are within 3’ of the lot line. We have asked John Thiesse to: 1) buy the property, 2) lease the property, or 3) not use the property. We are concerned about the legal liability in the event a ■ember of the Thiesse family is injured while using our property and John's homeowners liability insurance carrier initiates a claim against us. During this summer, John had a children’s swing set and boat trailers on our property. Due to our growing concern, we asked that he remove the items. Now he has applied for another building variance asking for a side lot variance and the conditions have changed. There is land available for him to acquire to the East thus eliminating the need for a side lot variance. The previous variance was granted predicated partially upon the premise **... this area which the applicant currently maintains appears visually a part of the applicants yard area...** ( see City Council Resolution *2812 dated 3/29/90 signed by former Mayor Grabek ). This is our land the city council is referring to and it is the land we wish to sell to the Thiesses prior to their obtaining a building permit. We ha\e offered to sell the land at an appraised value, but he has chosen to ignore the proposal and proceed with this variance request. Since the property is visually a part of his lot and he has chosen to treat it as such, we request the variance be denied pending negotiation toward acquisition of our property at fair aarket price. Sincerely, Lee and Julie Harren 175 Landmark Dr.,Orono,55356 John Thiesse Austin Evans Jeanne Mabusch J h Z • •• 0 CITY City of OROIVO ORONQ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO___2312 A RBSOLDTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND SECTION 2 0.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE #1529 WHEREAS, John Thiesse (hereinafter "the aoolicant") is the owner of the property located at 3845 Bayside Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legallv described as follows: Lot 62, Auditors Subdivision #203, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the app’ '-"ant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoni..^ Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (3) to permit the construction of an attached garage located 24' from the north side lot line, and 9.3' from the south side lot line, where 30* side setbacks are normally required, and located 6.7' from the street lot line where a 50' setback is normally required, and increasing the hardcover in the 75 — 250' setback zone to 50.4%, where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota': FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1529. 2. The property is located in the LR-lA Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 21, 1990, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: a) This is the only feasible location for a garage on the property. Page 1 of 4 City of OROIVO CITY ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CIT-Y COUNCIL NO. 2S12 ■ b) Hennepin County has given the applicant a verbal approval of the driveway layout proposed. c) The prooosed garage and driveway location will leave adequate room for parking vehicles o^f tne traveled ro*adway. d) Other ocssible garage configurations would require additional variances but provide less funcrronal access to the garage. e) Because the adjacent property to the northeast is an outlot recuired to be maintained for lake access purposes for * properties within the plat of Bayside Landing, this area which the applicant currently maintains aooears visually a part of applicant's yard area and reduces the impact of the additional structure on visual density in the neighborhood. f) There is no excess hardcover on the property which can be feasibly removed to reduce the hardcover percentage cn the property. There is no hardcover in rrp%?;;i:ai°eTy , there -is no additional land available to be purchased^ are hardships to the property which help justify granting of the variances. 4 The City Council has considered this application brci?y and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5 The City Council finds that the conditions existing on neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to oreserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. '' . Page 2 of 4 - i» :. City of OROrVO Cl nr OF ORONQ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2812 ■ CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS O.ono ^ nin, ?ins?.-^e%Va“cf ;ore^;::re-on^r- 9.3' from the south side line, 24- from the north “<»« “f®' and 6.7' from the street lot line, subject to the .ol - .5 conditions; 1. Hardcover on the property shall be limited wHh concurrent removals of existing hardcover, resulting m no net hardcover increase. 5 Authorises granted by this resolution run with the 3 Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and Lndltions of this variance shall constitute a violation of Lhe zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4 The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby hereb? agrees t\^rr%^lor"dfng"r “Air^^^^^ in the^^hain of title of the property. hv the Citv Council of the City of Oron^o, Minnesota fVeVl«"meetin^held on the 29th day of May, 1990. ff JL J > boertyOwner(s) Page 3 of 4 •• • • City of OROIVO city OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2812_________ ■ STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing in*«ument was eoknowledg^ this ,29th^S!y munYcipkl corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. %ennSim^n^ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS . COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) on this said county, p'ersonll^ appeared TVte^^^escrrbed an execuLed lHu Jrr?goYng"*ins%r^mentrand acknowledged that he (they, executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. JOANMK.AHENS NOTAfVr MUC-MIMVTA HH.V.NEPINCCUN7Y Iff OOMMUCN Dt^HCJ 7e2M9 notary PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) . , 199 __, before me a On this ------------for said County^ personally appearedNotary Public within and for saia uo i, v )cnown to _______________ - . . -'j—i_ m.'^A tjhrh Aveeuted the - -- - )cnown to —- - - - - --- - -described "in and who executed the ?«eg°oing ^SMu»Vnt"‘tnd acknowledged that he (they, executed a.a free act and deec-the same as his (their; tree notary public Page 4 of 4 J • «• •.«* • ■—< ' * *»»• ^ . r* 1 — - . . •• • - f ;• • r •^■ • •••• • •*•••••* ' •"*• ■ ' -i ::••^ * % . *.*. * Yil3Xj!.>a!£l«Js-AS-/<A!eM«*«w4K2;7>~C*_. ------------------LiKL MMKAM^fXMfScCk____ . ...7f'«*»::_<4*#A »mt*r • » it, «9vji7»*fc ;.. ---------iyj*ay • eic. »l|. Pitc /!>*» ,_• "JiC.___ .. Hxi „. .._i. ______ 6i4«TWMU»A ._ . _______ ______ __1. i»« I»«»_______ _ Ho^tif ...___rif ay .......• s/c. Arr.^JUM»»_ ;o^ay .............“Vdo prcK. laxts Yi« It y^i3 StctB 0*> ----------------------£*»1!.C*l3!__i. IVo____ _________________f?'’HL6».*r> _^ 50 — —-furyin__»»{,_______- it ---------------- .(Jttwr/O-fie^c/Ci • zri _l^r7 • ^mn*»u w— 3,1. fm » . . „ .............. . - - •• . •. mm^mmmm ■ ' 1 • • •• .s. . . :.. 0 ^ ^ • 1 . • • • •MM 9 « ■ I ■■ M - • • • . T • «♦%» • • •• A- • ■-. i ' A5^« *.* »»■ ■ * *•'•«* . .. . ,. ... - .. 1 . .•jg\X'-:.-'.r . -z ;.*••: tt'vi:".-- -i^- ~ i -^-r ' r?r.n?vV;. -• ..;>,•-.1 ' ••« ■^•••.waMri • ** ♦*'•** ?^^*jy**i*i ' ** ■ '** \' ■ *■ * ■; ' •'^ ' t • V •'/?^*'****+^"*^‘*;*''.......................... , ..^*. • c. ..-.:i „.*• ■■ » ^ ^.. .•. .Mt.-,--«•-...- i jr ^. ■; /'.>:.»■* i •,*:................. /(xjCAmo^Ai. I . B* ^<ess fMtcjAK* Ata/Kv^ nn» s. ai^v TWr t>^VfUi4y i-0-ili5 /4U.Ot^ ViHKCM fO -ror:4u.y t^iT>«>J t^fe^Ary ^ Aionf t>«4t -nwi /^«* /4^ /^4«t>cAy«^ /»si / ► To:Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator Proa: Date: COUNCIL MEETHie^ Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning December li» ±992 CITY OF OPOMO Subject: #1778/1779 Andrew Goetten, 1385 Fox Street - Variance/Subdivision Zoning District: RR-lB, Single family rural residential » 2 acre minimum lot size. Application: Request to split 3 acre parcel into 1 acre sewered lot and 2 acre unsewered lot, requiring a lot area variance. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit P - Exhibit G - City Engineer's Recommendation Letter Alternative Road Layouts Referenced Code and Comprehensive Plan Sections Notice of PC Action 11/23/92 Planning Commission Minutes 11/16/92 Resolution #1178 and 1980-81 Memos/Letters rlemo 6 Exhibits of 11/6/92 (Subdivision) 6 11/9/92 (Variance) I. Su —ary of Proposal, Application and Issues A. Applicant proposes to subdivide 3+ acre parcel into a 1 acre sewered lot with house and a 2 acre unsewered building site. B. In order to accomplish this, applicant has applied for a subdivision and lot area variance, because the current RR-IB zoning requires that both lots meet the 2 acre minimum lot size. C. Applicant's basis for the request is a 1980 Council resolution which was adopted during the process of assigning sewer units to the Minneton)ca Bluffs Sewer Project. That resolution appears to anticipate that the City would either grant a future lot area variance as part of the subdivison, rezone the Minneton)ca Bluffs area to a 1 acre standard or create some other mechanism to allow this subdivision to occur, and provided as follows: "1. Any future subdivision of the property must leave not less than 1 acre for the existing residence. 2. Any new building site which might be created will comply with all current zoning regulations at the time of subdivision. The intent of this provision being that any new lot created in the future is not intended to be served by the 80-1 Sewer .Zoning File #1778/1779 December 4, 1992 bmao lu Project but is intended to fully comply with all City on-site sewage treatment requirements. Therefore there is benefit to the property from the construction of the sewer to the extent of 1 unit." The resolution did not indicate whether this would be done by a lot area variance, a rezoning, or some other mechanism. D. The MUSA boundary adopted in 1981 bisects the property, clearly a response to the 1980 resolution. E. To further complicate matters, .he standard roadway dedications required as part of the current platting process will leave less than 3 acres of useable lot area, so that not only does the subdivision not meet the 4 acre minimum to create 2 lots, but cannot meet the conditions of the 1980 resolution for a 1 acre lot and a 2 acre lot. F. The City's current code and past policy and practice has been to consistently not allow subdivisions that require lot area variances. G. If the Council was to allow this subdivision with a lot area variance as proposed, this action could make it difficult to continue the Council's past policy of disallowing lot area variances with subdivisions. H. To avoid the lot area variance and avoid being inconsistent with the above policy, the Planning Commission recommended rezoning of the Bluffs area and the entire Goetten parcel to 1 acre zoning. I. Rezoning the entire Goetten parcel to 1 acre would be a conflict with the comprehensive land use plan which states that the urban area will not be expanded into the rural area for allowing increased development, and which states that urban density residential uses will be permitted only where municipal sanitary sewer is available. j. If a rezoning and MUSA boundary amendment was to occur, thereby bringing the property into the urban service area and providing it with sewer, this creates an opportunity for nearby properties and any properties adjacent to other rural sewer projects, to demand similar expansion of the urban area. Zoning File #1778/1779 December 4, 1992 Page 3 II• Background Discussions with Mr. Goetten during the 1980 Minnetonka Bluffs Sewer Project resulted in City Council adopting a resolution "determining standards for any future subdivision of the property". That resolution contemplated a lot split leaving one acre for the existing residence and a two acre unsewereed building site. The resolution did not, however, define whether that should happen through a lot area variance or through a rezoning. The MUSA boundary was subsequently amended in November 1981 to include the Minnetonka Bluffs area. The boundary was placed within the Goetten property, reflecting the intent of the resolution. Applicant is now requesting approval of a subdivision per the criteria set forth in 1980. The Planning Commission has reviewed this and recommends approval subject to a number of conditions, including rezoning the entire parcel and the Bluffs area to one acre, and dedication and limited improvement of the right-of-way. Their recommendation to rezone the west portion is directly because standard right-of-way dedications leaves less than 3.0 acres, making it impossible to meet the conditions of the resolution. II. Variance vs. Rezoning Staff and Planning Commission agree that Resolution No. 1178 proclaims a clear intent on the part of the City Council in 1980 to allow a one acre/two acre split of the property at some time in the future. Planning Commission feels that as a result, the City is morally, if not legally, obligated to allow the subdivision. Staff and Planning Commission concur that, although Resolution No. 1178 provides a uniqueness to this property not attributable to other properties, it would not be in the best interest of the City to grant a lot area variance with a subdivision. That has only occurred once in the seventeen years since the 1975 rezoning of the City (Stubbs Bay Marina, 1979-80) and since 1984 has been prohibited by Code Section 11.10, Subd. 14 (Exhibit B). A variance to lot area for a new subdivision could certainly result in pressure from other property owners for similar concessions, even though the Resolution makes Goetten's situation somewhat unique. Rezoning Will Have No Density Impact Rezoning of the Minnetonka Bluffs area (and perhaps other sewered areas of the City still in rural zones) would be a benefit to the residents of the area while not increasing the density of development, thereby being consistent with Orono's "low density" philosophy. Zoning File #1778/1779 December 4, 1992 Page 4 Staff has studied the existing development and lot sizes in the Minnetonka Bluffs area and has concluded that no existing vacant lot (other than the Goetten property) will be any more "developable" under one acre standards than it is today under two acre standards. The area contains no lots exceeding 2.0 acres gross area within the MUSA boundary. The average existing developed lot size in the Bluffs is 0.53 acre. There is one 0.5 acre lot which has been assessed for sewer and which could be expected to eventually request a lot are;* variance regardless of one acre or two acre zoning. Staff believes that the major impact of a rezoning to one acre would be to bring existing development into a higher degree of conformity and allow a greater percentage of proposed improvements to occur without the need for variances. LR»1B Most Appropriate Of the 25 properties involved, all but three are partially or wholly within the Ghoreland Overlay District, hence a rezoning to LR-IB, a lakeshore residential zone, would be appropriate. The applicant correctly notes that he indiv.dually should not apply for a general neighborhood rezoning, and a rezoning of just applicant's property would be considered a spot zoning whereas rezoning the neighborhood would not. Absent the City proposing a general area rezoning, applicant's only choice was to request a variance. Rezoninq Process Because the Planning Commission has recommended a rezonlng, the Council could effectuate such a rezoning by holding a public hearing upon due notice puolished in the paper. Although the code requires mailing to individual property owners only when the affected area is five acres or less, staff would propose to mail a notice to the affected property owners and other property owners in and within 350' of the 20-acre rezoning area. If Council wished to proceed with a rezoning, sufficient time exists that proper notice could be given in time for a hearing and rezoning adoption at your January 11 meeting. (Council may wish to have staff also consider what other sewered two acre zones of the City might also be considered for rezoning to one acre without increasing density.) III. Right-Of-Way and Inprovenents The property abuts Orono Orchard Road and Fox Street. Because Orono Orchard Road is platted 66’ wide for its entire length, the City would require a 33' dedication be formalized on the plat. No improvements to Orono Orchard Road are deemed necessary as a result of this application. Zoning File #1778/1779 December 4, 1992 Page 5 Fox Streets from which the applicant's existing residence and three other residences currently gain access, for this short section is platted at only a 30' width, and is not paved but contains a 20' wide gravel road. As a local street, the standard right-of-way for such a road would be 50', with a 24-28' paved surface, and an 80' diameter paved cul-de-sac (100' dedicated diameter). The City Engineer initially recommended that an additional 20' of right-of-way and the bulk of cul-de-sac be dedicated from the property. He also recommended that the road and cul-de-sac be Improved to current standards, the cost to be assessed to the benefitting property owners. The Engineer's proposal has the effect of leaving less than three contiguous acres within the main body of the property, therefore a one acre/two acre split would require a lot area variance for one or both lots. Planning Commission felt this was too much to ask of the applicant but did recommend that 10' additional right-of-way be dedicated along the south side of Fox Street, that only the south half of a cul-de-sac be dedicated based on the center line of the resulting 40' right-of-way, and that the road be paved but the cul-de-sac not developed. The Planning Commission option would have a future negative impact on properties to the north. In either case, the drainfield sites for the two acre lot would be affected, although with only a 10' dedication and a 10' septic setback varxance the currently proposed sites appear feasible. Planning Commission further recommended that access for the two acre lot be from Fox Street rather than from Orono Orchard Road, and further recommended that the rezoning incorporate the entire Goetten property so that after dedications, there would be no need for lot area variances because a 1.0 acre lot and a 1«9+ acre lot (which would not be further subdividable) would meet the one acre zoning district standards. Alternative Road Layouts The Zoning staff. Public Works Director, and City Engineer met late in November to consider if there are other road options which give greater flexibility for the future and have a lesser impact on existing residences. The results are indicated by Exhibits B-3 and B-4. B-4 includes a 10' dedication yielding a total 40' right-of-way coupled with an additional 10' standard drainage and utility easement (this is a variance from City standard of 50' right-of- way) and dedication of a cul-de-sac at the east end of the property. This would provide future access for the City's sewer lift station and the residence at 1300 Fox Street if the Dakota Rail crossing is eliminated some time in the future. Zoning File #1778/1779 December 4, 1992 Page 6 The cul-de-sac would not necessarily have to be developed at this time, and the road would be paved from Orono Orchard Road to just past Barrett Avenue with a back-up type turnaround constructed in Barrett Avenue. Staff proposes this as a better alternative than platting a cul-de-sac near the adjoining residences as shovm in Exhibit B-3. IV. Lake Access Parcel Planning Commission had no problem with the concept that the lake access parcel could be left as an outlot to be owned in common with either Lot 1 or Lot 2 (but not both), or as an outlot could be sold to an adjacent property owner for combination. Platted as an outlot, the future disposition of the parcel need not be further tied down at the time of subdivision, however, the final plat approval resolution should list these three allowable alternatives for its use. V. Miscellaneous Issues 1. Planning Commission recommended that the two acre lot remain outside the sewered area and be served by septic systems until such time that the MUSA boundary is extended, but did not recommend that the City proceed with a MUSA boundary revision. Coupled with the proposed rezoning to 1-acre (urban) standards, this concept seems diametrically opposed to the Comprehensive Plan's Urban Land Use Policy, which clearly states (page 4-18, item 7): "... urban-density residential uses will be permitted only where municipal sanitary sewer ... (is) available." Item 9 on page 4-18 indicates that "the urban service area (i.e. 1-acre zone by definition, CMP page 4-25) will not be expanded into the rural area ... for purposes of fostering or allowing increased development in those areas." The questions that must be asked are: Will the City rezone a 2-acre zone to 1-acre without a concurrent MUSA amendment? Will the City expand its urban service area solely for the purpose of allowing creation of a new lot that would be substandard in its current zoning district? 2. Under a 10' dedication/10' drainage and utility easement scenario, no additional septic testing is required and the 10' setback from the right-of-way will be acceptable. If anything more than 10' of additional right-of-way is requested for Fox Street, then additional site evaluation will be necessary to ensure that septic systems can be suitably located, if the property won't be served with sewer. Zoning File #1778/1779 December 4, 1992 Page 7 3.The applicant's surveyor should verify whether the triangular portion of Orono Lane right-of-way has been properly dedicated, and if not, do so on the plat. 4.The plat will be subject to a conservation and flowage easement over the wetlands, the standard drainage and utility easements along lot lines, and payment of a park fee for the new lot. 5.Apparently, the City or it's contractor disturbed the judicial landmark at the east end of the property during the 1980 sewer project. Staff should be directed to proceed with having that landmark accurately replaced. 6.Because the existing garage will encroach into the roadway after additional road dedication, the garage needs to be removed as a condition of the subdivision. VI. Planning Connission Reccusnendation The Planning Commission recommendation can be reviewed in Exhibit D. VII. staff RecOTrcndation This is a difficult application because applicant requests a lot area variance without rezoning, which the subdivision code prohibits, and Planning Commission suggests a rezoning of the rural area to create a higher density, which is against the Comprehensive Plan policies. Staff feels that, while the applicants have relied on a resolution by a past Council, certainly that action is not binding on future Councils. While staff does not oppose conceptually the idea of creating a 1-acre sewered lot and a 2-acre unsewered lot, rezoning of the entire property to accommodate a further lot area variance due to normal roadway dedications seems to be stretching the City's policies. Council should not dismiss the option of denial. While the applicant did not appeal the assessment for the 1980 sewer project, he did pay the same reduced price for the sewer as the property owners who appealed. If applicant feels wronged by a denial that reverses a past Council action and ignores his granting of an easement to the City at no cost in 1980, then the City could consider paying him the current value of that easement, deny the subdivision and consider the matter closed. ♦ I Zoning File #1778/1779 December 4, 1992 Page 8 If Denial is not an acceptable alternative to the Council# Council should choose one of these procedural options: A.Approve per applicant's request; grant lot area variance (no road dedications to reduce acreage below 2.0/1.0 acres). B.Grant lot area variance# require road dedications that require further variances because acreage is reduced below 2.0/1.0 acres. C.Deny lot area variances/rezone to LR-lB/allow new lot on septic. D.Deny lot area variances/rezone to LR-IB/MUSA amendment/west lot is sewered via easement over east lot. E.Other. Options B# C and D suggest road dedications and/or improvements will be required. The various options for road dedication and improvement are as follows: A. B. C. No dedications or improvement. No dedications/improved within existing right-of-way. Dedicate/improve per engineer's primary recommendation (Exhibit B-2). Dedicate/improve per Planning Commission recommendation with staff revision (B-3). E. Dedicate/improve per engineer's alternative recommendation (B-4). F, Other. With any approval option# staff would recommend the following additional conditions: 1. Lot 1 shall access onto Fox Street. 2. 3. Dedicate 33' rig».t-of-way for Orono Orchard Road. Dedication of triangular portion of Orono Lane if not already dedicated. 4. Conservation and flowage easement over wetlands. Zoning File #1778/1779 December 4, 1992 Page 95. Standard drainage and utility easements along lot lines.6. Park fee.7. City to replace traditional landmark at east end of property.8. Remove existing garage that as a result of dedications will be encroaching into right-of-way. 9. Lake access parcel to be platted as an outiotr to be owned in common with Lot 1 or with Lot 2 or to be sold for combination with one of the adjacent neighboring properties. Options for council Action 1. Approval (Council must direct staff to draft a resolution for preliminary plat approval/ and Council must provide staff with clear direction regarding each issue). 2. Denial (Direct staff to draft a resolution for denial). 3. Table (provide clear direction as to what/ if any# additional information is required). Isv Oao G •£Boor* 0/ SCiCi^i. Pi • C Artcr<% PfVjrvi*^ I Se-vjy. Bf •m fc Vvt.Sr'tM If : a*t ijI \rt<i #:G *CV l3c«'A CPA A SlHbH Pg PCtn A. Gowi P| «ct« t P'^At^e. •!^'*' Bcttf* •? I^>V‘U C UwtOfd. pfC PiiJlf t. A I A A lcv>wcn. PI A huruyi. PI V<'*ic< • t^jrffun?*. PPIfAO«^ai t A«C5W A CQr.4€ C •U.'IKCt. PI rncmil C Anguv Pf Mwr.rtf. P|Micrj#i f law Pf Ac^ei M firg ajC P W IVr^Of* Pf vc**j?' C P>•rry O p|«err«« it AfVrrscifi P| Uif% 9 la v Pt Vjfir A Sc-a PS G4»y w Vcrr'v PI•!Cyyi K Kwerw-'an Pi Pnco i CJl*Afi» PI Mam 0. ‘X^nv IF vt* B P2t P^nVtf la Pfi PIZjy J PiP N^wrr P£ <rr" I ^*Td P| Sajw »*j OwWa/' Cm wi CbTvif* PP C”a* r*. Awrc VWJ< V C'VCABonestroo Rosene AnderlikA |\|| AssociatesEngineers S ArchitectsDecember 7, 1992City of Orono Box 66 Ciystal Bay. MN 55323 Attn: Mr. Mike Gaffron Re: File No. 139 - 1778 Goetten Subdivision Dear Mike, We have reviewed the planning commission recommendation for the Goetten Subdivision. The recommendation was to move the cul-de-sac north and only construct the section south of Fox Street at this time. The recommendation would not allow the cul-de-sac to be completed until the home at 1380 Fox Street is moved because acceptable setbacks could not be met This option does not provide an acceptable alternative for future completion of the cul-de-sac. If the original option for the cul-de-sac location is not acceptable, we would recommend moving the cul-de-sac location east The cul-de-sac could be moved east 35 feet as shown on the attached drawing. This would provide a minimum 30' setback to all houses in the area. The garage located on Barrett Avenue would not meet setback requirements. This garage is located on City right-of-way and should be removed or the right-of-way vacated except for utility easements. The cul-de-sac could be moved east to near Hanlon Avenue to also provide access to the prop­ erty at 1350 Fox Street and the City lift station. These two properties currently get access from CSAH 15 across the railroad. Construction at this time would consist of a Hammer Head Turn Around at Barrett Avenue. The street segment from Barrett Avenue to Hanlon Avenue would be constructed in the future as required. The subdivision should provide additional right-of-way along Fox Street plus adequate right-of-way for the cul-de-sac near Hanlon Avenue. Please contact this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERUK & ASSOCIATES, INC. ./C^ Glenn R. Cook GRC:li 139.cor h 4 nNftiiik H n Pfr<iu;/ihViytlC^DeC>/CA.T70Ay//v^(>/^e(/e■Mt'>AJ7~ CFriof-i'^ ^'f-'r.. E,, S - / ^ /f 5 /^/^^oie>c> ey Aff‘i-tcA^T^— AJO ^mP^UC'/MDAJTS-*A>o re/)/4cl^ t>eti(cA-T70A^X <iPcC4?/^T" 3E ’dJjcCr— /-dT- / s 2iO/ AC.•■ 4ot" 2. — />oo Ac. bA^y 1. The of Fox t1380 es not loving >n the . The icated utility prop- ifrom I Turn would )f-way «« * * 59.cor S-2. j4 Ciry^AJ6/Ajg»yie4 — ^AVr ^ cuL^'^is^cAC ““PeUiCA^ /H>tirrt Z2^d po^f^oK ^ ^i/C-2><!T'^Ac. Ac-. rz>r^c **4-07 “ / ~ /»78 Ac • 4o*r 2- * A 00 Ac t>/^y B"3 ^ P4A7VJ/0/AJC CO^»ul$S/0>0 £rci>iMMauD>AT70Aj pAVg. j2X>AC SAc^uA AP/2 oaj ^b^blOcf^ AtOTt fO*Fi>^ fw ^7^ ^4Ui: P/£0-ftATA /^^A370aJ /oo' cuu-bC'SAO CcMd/zj^EC/^ s<-/66dvrs YZe\/ts:t(if<i to Mo\je Ct'^'Oe'SAc ^o-vo’CAmoAiio) "“ 4or / = /• 88 Ae i; 4ot 2 ^ A Ao- 3>Ay p/ii/F /eoAt^ 6A ck *^P /dAtbih^ fo/^Fip/: ST. p^ns t^JbeMeb >€.0.u3, 1 At eAST 6:^Jb ^>F= ei^Pc*^'f V Fo^ FurMe.^ ct^uO&sAc, Ac<Z^SS TO 3TA770AJ ><5!*^C /3CO F^X. - /. AC "7 Z-07 “ 2 Cviouse^ *“4^0 Ac 1>CY • • I iifatiVtr MtflWtftfrthi I ail_____ - • i L >1 1 >*11 1 /y / //y> \ 1 1 • • I * ✓ I-r I^HO ^ ^ .»»» ♦ » ^» IfR 't 1 9 * 1 ^ m1•; »«i '{ -;j.'•i i ^ irt--^ t$t%rmt ,♦ c 11»^ i-111111 v:f'l*' N.b-i ««■ -^**1 - ‘ '> \ \ 4- '8 ^§(w 1 > l#l 9\ u t \ Vi r..- Ki BuiLbAice^ Tt»r*u * 3,0/ a<^ r#«» -«'»«■* mf *^r» ^**r t l.*i i *t 000*^ 00t0**^ f»**t0€. Ait0 z-' J0^rw fdir a ^,14 t drMfi - Iiw-i-rwen^p /"•fro' i -n. ..«»»«>« H E?-2 C.W1 /^t>t>ino/UAt. ^.O.LO Tt» B* P^iCA7«w fen. C\Ty f «&/«.. (o.ISa<. !»/ Lmr l'^ (^>.08 ^c 2) jj Z.7ft Ac- Pfl/, So : ________/.*7ft *c 2-* l>0f> ^grt»^*^9 0M0»*m 0mt0**^ jUfM ttf t0^rm ^ssr 9 0,t4t staff . ................ « .1 - itfar-ri-- ■^CisottBtiMr<r<trrfk^MP^Biirai^^^f#.-^c»,"irTt;^iiTU#Mmw uwi—w iiBimriiirrMf immi’ii i iinrMimitnr.Mii B-i 'pc. “* /P’ C.P.iO, pi>«. pOK Qf^'-'* /**»--. . - o T-o Wn.o.ui':^ eM >r / */.VSp i*“wf wo^r so lor ! • 4.^ Z •• / STAVi 0«.f e^ f^uuA •• •• »i £>/j jpprrc •• * ^v»0 C/^t'LiT /^'^uWTt. _ OA^,-n> sr^ /•■5 4 f^rcvz* TO /f*^ C*r* rmr^t M0^rm 9 'r>r-T< Aits*** J^rw f^ir m 0,t4tsUfg — f^tone. ^hmFF^ /f^cc.. e*i77Ae^ «5oer»>»J /)b«p. 7-0 \ hc.-zt>f^€...r^i y *'-/ ' Ayri£>^ 1-r* C./2A1/T / /» VHit.. 7-<P Cr«>*: . _ ^e'^T' /'•‘-'Z //'>«^-* t <T!" *^ • . tffr / • - 4^r- Z • /.O -#- /4«^ ' • •4 «« l<*iriM« ** e "OW4C 2 »S t__*J\ «*f. I----- i \ \ ...y W/#r ^mmm$ i ,1’i- /• Atr.ie«4«H. r^r^t A^94 A/ Ji^sr» ^Sir , f,42tst 4srt44st^t 00tsf4ss SI0M0 fu^j^ J.fftsc J4f. ,j,r- , t.24t4„„ r'^iso* ■# < .«rvvri4^ 1 u S 11.10Subd. 14. Special Requirements For Plats.A. Zoning Regulations, Every plat shall conform to existing zoning regulations and subdivision regulations applicable at the time of Final Plat approval. Variances shall not be approved to increase the overall subdivision density above the minimum lot area requirements of the applicable zoning district and this Chapter. ~~ B. Public Improvements. The Planning Commission may recommend that all public improvements be installed and dedicated prior to the signing of the Final Plat by the City. If the Planning Commission does not recommend that all public improvements be installed and dedicated prior to signing of the Final Plat by the City, the amount of the bond shall be established by the Zoning Administrator based upon the recommendation of the City Engineer, which bond shall be submitted by the subdivider at the time of application for Final Plat approval. The Planning Commission shall require the subdivider to indicate on the plat all private and public improvements, which shall be required to be established or extended and any other special requirements deemed necessary by the Planning Commission in order to conform the plat to the Comprehensive Municipal Plan and this Chapter. C. Grading of Site Prior to Final Approval. Subsequent to Preliminary Plat approval by the Council, the subdivider may apply for a land alteration permit from the City and upon receipt of such permit may commence construction to the grades and elevations required by plans approved by the City. D. Referral to Other Government Agencies or Jurisdictions. Following action by the Council on the Preliminary Plat, the Zoning Administrator will refer the Preliminary Plat and the Council's action to other government agencies or jurisdictions for their review and action as may be appropriate prior to Council action on the Final Plat, Subd. 15. Effective Period of Preliminary Subdivision Review, Planning Commission recommendations concerning any Class I Subdivision and the Council resolution concerning any Class II and Class III Preliminary Plat shall remain effective for one year. Failure to file a complete Final Subdivision application within this time period shall be construed as formal withdrawal of the proposed subdivision. For one year following preliminary approval, unless the subdivider and the City agree otherwise, no amendment to a comprehensive plan or official control shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout, or dedication or platting required or permitted by the approved application. Thereafter, pursuant to its regulations, the City may extend the period by agreement with the subdivider and subject to all applicable performance conditions and requirements, or it may require submission of a new application unless substantial physical ORONO CC 436 (4-1-84) I> _pr - V ; L/ ) ^*^vV r'^/o:i LAND USE JUNE, 1980 If the individual development's density increase or impact is relatively small, or the layout is not conducive to public land dedication, then in lieu of lands the developer may be required to contribute funds for the municipal purchase of such lands or the improvement of such facilities proportionate to the cumulative effect of such density increase from multiple small developments. 17. NO LAND WILL BE DEVELOPED UNLESS IT’S LOCATION AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS ARE SUITABLE FOR THE PROPOSED USE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS PLAN. Land to be developed must be of such size, character and location that it can be safely used for the intended purpose without danger to health, without peril from fire, flood or other occurrence and without undue impact upon neighboring properties. No land will be permitted to be subdivided or built upon which is held unsuitable by the City for the proposed use because of flood hazards, inadequate drainage, soil formations with severe limitations for development, severe erosion potential, unfavorable topography, inadequate water supply or sewage disposal capabilities, or any other feature likely to be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the future residents of the proposed subdivision or of the community. URBAN LAND USE POLICIES 1.THE MAJORITY OF ORONO' S URBAN AREA WILL BE RESERVED FOR RESIDENTIAL LAND USE. Orono's urban residential neighborhoods will provide the opportunity for a variety of housing types and price ranges. Many urban residences will be Intimately associated with the lake shoreline and will be subject to density restrictions because of sensitive environmental conditions. Low-density multi-family residential uses will be limited to locations near existing shopping and transportation services, but will not be appropriate within 1,000 feet of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka. CMP 4-16 d iI I 1 I M I I 1 I I 1 i f 1 I f m LAND USE JUNE, 1980 2. 3. 4. 5. LIMITED COMMERCIAL AREAS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE BUSINESSES. The primary function of Orono's commercial areas will be to provide those retail, commercial and service businesses which are directly necessary to serve Orono's urban and rural residents. Commercial development will be limited to areas where full urban services, including municipal sanitary sewer and adeguate transpoitation are available. Commercial development of a regional nature which would duplicate existing services in the neighboring town centers will be discouraged. LAKESHORE COMMERCIAL AREAS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR PUBLIC ACCESS AND LIMITED LAKE-USER SERVICES. Orono's residents and other lake users require lake access, fishing supplies, boat service and boat repair facilities which are unique to our location on a recreational development lake. orono's Land Use Plan will provide locations for such special*purpose businesses vhere appropriate from both the land use and the lakeside environmental standpoint. No use or location will be permitted to adversely affect the lake -juality or the public's general usage of the lake. All lakeshore commercial is to be limited to areas whore full urban services, including municipal sanitary sewer, and adequate transportation are available. THE CITY WILL ENCOURAGE PRIVATE UNIFICATION AND COORDINATION OF THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL AREAS. Unplanned strip commercial developments will be discouraged. Coordinated projects designed to aesthetically enhance, unify and identify the business areas will be encouraged. FUTURE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT WILL BE LIMITED TO THE AREA OF THE EXISTING INDUSTRIAL PARK. No other location in Orono combines the availability of transportation and public utilities with remoteness from sensitive environmental features. In addition, this land use is entirely consistent with Long Lake's neighboring industrial development. CMP 4-17 LAND Al^JUNE, 1980 6. COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL t'ROPERTY. The location and scale of conunercial and industrial development will be controlled so as not to encroach — upon the primary residential land uses in Orono. Wherever possible, natural land forms or buffers will be required between different land uses. 7. PUBLIC URBAN SERVICES MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR ALL FUTURE COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL AND URBAN“RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. Commercial, industrial and urban-density residential uses will be permitted only where municipal sanitary sewer, adequate transportation, police and fire protection services are available. In addition, commercial, industrial and multi-family residential development will be permitted only where a municipal vater system is available for adequate water supply and fire protection. 8. URBAN DEVELOPMENT WILL UTILIZE THE CAPACITY OF EXISTING PUBLIC FACILITIES. New land uses and develrpment will be allowed to infill existing vacant properties within the urban service area consistent with environmental limitations and with the existing capacities of water, sewer, drainage transportation and recreational facilities. New development will not be permitted to overburden these services at the expense of the existing users. New urban development will not be permitted if it requires additional unplanned local or regional facilities capacity. 9. THE EXISTING URBAN AREA WILL NOT BE EXPANDED. Orono's Community Management Plan is not a staged growth plan. The urban service area will not be expanded into the yujjai area and urban services and facilities will not be extended into the rural area for purposes of fostering or allowing increased development in those areas. 10. THE DESIGN AND DENSITY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT WILL BE CONTROLLED TO ASSURE PROTECTION OF LIGHT, AIR 'vND SOLAR ACCESS FOR NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. Requirements for .ivnimum lot size, amounts of open space, minimum yard setbacks, and maximum building heights will be designed to assure protection of these values for alj. urban residents. * CMP 4-18 i; tm1! i i i j 1 I j 1 1 1 1 1 ] 1 I AND USE JUNE, 1980 11. A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF NATURAL WOODLANDS AND OPEN SPACE WILL B*;. RETAINED ON EACH PROPERTY. Retention of the natural environment requirer. '-areful siting and preservation of trees and open space on each urban property. 12. LAND USE STANDARDS WILL LIMIT THE IMPACT OF URBAN ENCROACHMENT ON LAKE MINNETONKA. Minimum lot width will space out docks and structural encroachments while increasing areas of natural vegetation. Lake use regulations will limit the number of boats per property and the amount of public waters available for private docking and boat storage. 13. RETENTION OF NATURAL VEGETATION WILL LIMIT THE IMPACT OF URBANIZATION AS VISIBLE FROM THE LAKE. Building heights will be limited to less than the typical tree height. Minimum green belts will be provided with pro­ hibitions against clearcutting nr excessive thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes and retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation. RURAL LAND tJSP POLICIES 1. ORONO’S RURAL SERVICE AREA VILL BE RESERVED FOR PERMANENT LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE. Orono's rolling rural area is not suitable for commercial agriculture. Likewise, the delicate balance of storm water nutrient loading vs marshland assimilative capacity preclude expansion of the urban service area without major env ronmental problems for Lake Minnetonka. Therefore, the ideal land use for that portion of Orono located outside of the Urban Service Area (MUSA) is the planned low-density rural residential land use. Commercial and industrial uses will not be permitted in the rural area. I CMP 4-19 LAND USE JUNE, 1980 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. ORONO'S RURAL SERVICE AREA PROVIDES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR QUASI- AGRICULTURAL LAND USES. Greenhouses, orchards, ^ruck farms, riding stables and recreation areas such as large golf courses and park reserves are not possible in more crowded urban areas but they are compatible with rural residential properties. Thus, the total commercial activity of Orono is broader and more varied than if the City were all urban or all rural. RURAL DENSITY IS LIMITED BY NATURAL CONDITIONS. Development of rural Orono is naturally limited by a number of conditions including extensive wetlands, steep slopes and areas of high water table, which factors influence building locations and transportation options as well as the location and spacing of on—site sewage treatment systems. THE EXISTING RURAL AREA WILL NOT BE URBANIZED. Orono*s Community Management Plan is not a staged growth plan. The urban service area will not be expanded into the rural area. Municipal urban services will not be extended into the rural area Rural land usesor across open, rural lands, and rural land use density will be maintained at a leve1 to ensure that private on-site sewer systems will operate satisfactorily and that rural wetlands and drainageways will not be overloaded with storm water nutrient pollution. RURAL LAND USES AN?) DENSITIES DO NOT REQUIRE URBAN SERVICES. Urban services are not compatible with rural land use. Extension of certain urban services, such as extensive public road maintenance or municipal sewer or water cannot be economically justified or easily provided to developments in rural ■'rcas or at rural densities. RURAL LAND USES DO NOT REQUIRE MUNICIPAL SEWER SERVICE, Orono*s soil, topography and low-density rural land use provide the ingredients necessary to assure safe, adequate, permanent on-site sewage treatment and waste water disposal without hazard to ground water, surface water or the public health. CMP 4-20 I > i I ( I d 0 i I 1 i I LAND USE JUNE, 1980 I i I J i 7. RURAL DEVELOPMENT WILL BE SUBJECT TO PROVEN ON-SITE SEWAGE* TREATMENT CAPABILITY. Future development in the rural area will be contingent upon the developer providing prior technical evidence that the site contains sufficient suitable land for all development, an acceptable primary drainfield area, and reserved space for at least one alternate drainfield area/ The zoning area requirements for rural Orono will therefore be based upon minimum areas of dry buildable land exclusive of roadways, wetlands, streams or areas of high water table. 8. RURAL DEVELOPMENT MUST BE SELF-SUPPORTING. All future development in the rural area will be required to be proven self-supporting for the intended use, especially in terms of water supply, sewage treatment and internal improvement maintenance, so as to prevent extension of costly urban services into the rural area. 9. RURAL LAND USE DENSITIES WILL ALLOW MAXIMUM RETENTION OF PRIVATE WOODS AND OPEN SPACE. Low rural densities will accommodate homesites without affecting the traditional vistas of open fields and woods. The retention of these woodlands and marsh­ lands will then assure permanent habitat for our abundant wildlife. Public open space will be provided on a large-scale or Park Reserve Basis, but neighborhood or mini—parks are unnecessary because of the large amount of availab”! ^ privately owned and maintained open space. 10. RURAL WETLANDS AND MARSHLAND WILL BE MAINTAINED AND PROTECTED FOR SURFACE WATER RETENTION AND FILTRATION. As total population in the watershed increases, the total requirement for storm water filtration will increase. Orono's rural land use plans will protect all of our rural wetlands and marshland for future use as retention ponds and nutrient filters including the capability of accepting recycled urban storm water for increased nutrient filtration. CMP 4-21 LAND USE JUNE, 1980 11. RURAL LAKESHORE AREAS WILL HAVE DUAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. The low-density residential land uses will automatically reduce environmental pressures on the shoreline. In addition, the rural areas will be subject to the same shoreline protection performance standards as the urban areas, including minimum setbacks, green belts, clear- cutting prohibitions and lake use regulations. Taken together, these factors should preserve to a large extent the original appearance of Orono's rural shoreline as seen from the lake. THE LAND USE PLAN MAP NO. 6 INDICATES THE BASIC LAND USE PLAN OF THE CITY: THE DESIGNATION OF ORONO'S URBAN SERVICE AREA AND ORONO'S RURAL SERVICE AREA. The detailed location of the dividing line (the MUSA line) between the Urban Service Area and the Rural Service Area has been established by careful evaluation of each of the elements of this Community Management Plan. Environmental concerns, historic land use patterns, and the availability of sewer, transportation and other public facilities all enter into the local decision of actual MUSA line location. Orono's Urban Service Area identifies those portions of the City that have been provided with public services and facilities necessary to support urban types and densities of land use as defined by the Metro­ politan Council's Development Framework Guide. Orono's Rural Service Area identifies those portions of the City that do not have urban services and are not planned to have urban services. Orono's Rural Service Area intended to permanently accommodate General Rural Land Uses an*’ housing densities defined by the Metropolitan Council, and as distinctly different from a Commercial Agricultural region. Orono's MUSA line location as shown on Map No. 6 has been legally described and established by City Council Resolution No. 1135 adopted April 14, 1980. This Resolution is included in the CMP Appendix. The detailed location of this line will not be changed without further official action of the City Council. Orono's MUSA line location as shown on Map No. 6 is consistent with the broad-brush location of the MUSA line as drawn by the Metropolitan Council. Orono's MUSA line location is consistent with the MUSA location and land use plans of adjoining municipalities. Orono's MUSA line location d rec y affects the detailed land use and facilities plans of the City. MAP NO. 7 INDICATES THE DETAILED LAND USE PLAN OF THE CITY, IDENTIFYING APPROPRIATE LAND USES AND DENSITIES FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL NEIGHBO^OOD. This land use map will form the basis for land use zoning decisions. I i 1 I CMP 4-22 I JUNE, 1980 LAND USE URBAN LAND USE I URBAN RESIDENTIAL LAND USE \ 1 j ^ 11 retain the basic single family character Urban residential for a limited diversity of housing of the community but will also * ff” available services, the types at generally Hnilronmen^l projection. Planning ^T^rLi’^^prrtm^jrjo-je-j^i^jd nrai^"’’ :o::e“iSri°r.rri;hr?Sr ”«:;? planned Lnslty of the neighborhood. Urban residential development ”^"^j''rejreat‘^onal facilities :-r“h:r ‘”nrar*ujj:n :«-«"“ihe MtSnStjnj: :nr«e‘*p«ject!^r:f the natural wetlands system for storm water filtration and purification. All urban residential land ?Ld''!!se*'de^nt?e! li^rSe^"'* jr'.ijirrihn^nnrjrrtjrtj:^:": ^mimal dlr.ct ,torm water runoff pollution• URBAN RESIDENTIAL - 1 DWELLING PER AC^ have particu r environmental impact on the lake. I 1 I 1 I 4 This is ‘he typical^land °'ijSSoJjjjdjc:rtiin ”o?jer jLiSI“ni“r.as are planned “‘'HiniH available beyond 1,000 feet from the lakeshore. Munic p _ is generally provided to these districts for supp y protection, in addition to the necessary -ewer servic . URBAN RESIDENTIAL - 3 to 6 DWELLINGS PER AC^ Xh... densities are provided mj^^irdensttr:pP-- ^ shown on the Land Use Plan. T .a. densities will be limited '’“““lJ°jroje«ierwh;re'’*p«tSrcjn5itions such as abutting land us. would make the lot appropriate for housing “'^^"“jnJironjojital.“rjujrnvjHpLnrm^r-briLi ^irtn^r^I^ed on an InS!“d«“LstfrjjhL than Savin, such a density identified in a broad-brush plan. CMP 4-25 LAND USE JUNE, 1980 URBAN COMMERCIAL LAND USE Urban commercial development is limited to two areas which are provided with all the necessary urban services and facilities. The major commercial center of Orono will continue to be the crossroads center of Navarre. This area will provide sufficient opportunity for neighborhood retail and service businesses, plus adequate professional offices, to serve the needs of most Orono residents. Accessory functions such as offices and owner- occupied living units or limited multi-family developments will be considered appropriate in or near the Navarre commercial area. I I /n additional limited commercial area is designated on Highway 12 adjacent to similar land uses in the City of Long Lake. This area has utilities available from the City of Long Lake and will provide neighborhood services complimentary to those available in that City. LAKESHORE COMMERCIAL LAND USE Lake access and lake user service businesses are appropriate for a lakeside community and require a lakeshore location. Special performance standards are necessary to assure protection of the lake environment And protection of neighboring properties. The prinAry purpose is to permit those functions thAt are directly necessary to support normal lake-use activities such as boat launching, boat service, boat repairs and fishing supplies. Lakeshore commercial are not intended for typical retail activities, including boat sales, which could be accomplished away from the lake. Accessory functions such as parking, winter storage and caretaker facilities will be appropriate in the lakeshore commercial areas. One lakeshore commercial area is indicated on the Land Use Plan along Maxwell Bay where resorts and marinas have historicallv existed. Sanitary sewer is available for boat sanitation purposes. Expansion of the existing facilities is limited however by surrounding residential neighborhoods, lack of public transportation, and environmental constraints including a crowded bay. Therefore, only the one contiguous area is considered approprlA^B for dedicAblon t:o this US6. Additional lakeshore commercial facilities do exist along County Road 15 north of Tanager Lake Bridge. This area has fewer transportation and environmental problems than Maxwell Bay, but it is not designated in this Plan for commercial use because municipal sewer and other urban services are not available. This area would be considered for future lakeshore commercial designation should sanitary sewer become available as projected in the CSPP Facilities Plan. I I I CMP 4-26 10 J i 1 1 ( LAND USE JUNE, 1980 1 1 I J 1 ! i ! I IS i ] I URBAN INDUSTRIAL LAND USE Orono's Industrial Park along Highway 12 west of Long Lake is planned to continue as the only appropriate area for Industrial-type activity in the City. Adequate transportation including rail facilities are available as is municipal water and sanitary sewer. The area is remote from extensive residential development. Accessory functions such as office buildings will be permitted in the industrial area. URBAN EDUCATIONAL LAND USE The Orono School District Campus on Old Crystal Bay Road between Highway 12 and Sixth Avenue North is planned to continue as the only land necessary or appropriate for high density educational facilities. The area is central within the school district and is served by adequate transportation, water and sewer. Sufficient land is available in one contiguous piece for all necessary facilities and for any future expansion should that ever be required. URBAN RECREATIONAL FACILITIES Urban parks, trails, and open space are not indicated on the Land Use Plan because the planned facilities are all relatively small neighborhood or mini-parks which are immediately accessory to the overlaying urban residential land use. The only recreational facilities identified in the ujfban area are swimming beaches and lake access points which attract a significant number of urban residents. RURAL LAND USE RURAL RESIDENTIAL LAND USE Rural residential development will be limited to single family dwellings, with a minimum dry-buildable lot size of at least two acres. When the total number of forecast rural households (1267) is divided into the total rural acreage of Orono (8960 acres) , the gross rural density becomes one unit per seven acres. This is a reflection on the extensive amounts of wetlands and public open space that occupies our rural service area, which in turn is a primary reason why extension of urban services into this region is impractical and uneconomic. The ol inned rural density of at least 2.0 dry-buildable net acres per dwelling will permanently support on-site water supply and sewage treatment systems. The planned rural density will not overload or adversely affect the natural wetlands and storm water filtration system so necessary to the preservation of Lake Minnetonka's water quality. The resulting population densities will require no major changes to the public road system. CMP 4-27 I• t LAND USE JUNE, 1980 ::: :ir r. bn;:.. •nHHnbnjibni.rpr.,erving th. -id.st choice of lifectyle possible tor Orono residents. c.rtein restrictions on rural residential development will be blcluse of the existence of numerous wetlands and drainageways to Lake Minnetonka, steep slopes, soil type ?^e*nee5 for expensive pSsnr::i “crs-sur:: "ncira'-nrti^y-^^^^ricjpai water.^oor improvements in public transpopation, and = lakeshore bDlubjlct to the same protective restrictions as urban lands in addition to the low«r land use density of the area. orono-s rural residential density will not »* ^S^rs^ dwelling per two ■>Py-*>“iie-‘=l**=!rtSrtn ”e:s.fneerfSr costly urban environmental impact and because of will not be decreased below AArvices Orono*s rural residential density will:s!t*:::his:tr;r”raS!t“ror*thrr:i:i"?e^?d:“rtre::ro:!caiiy maintain their property. RURAL RESIDENTIAL - 1 DWELLING PER TWO ACRES This is the typical rural residential density developed and “e"' ’‘r“«“Ln:it;“??rbe"!llSw:d\:Ltrr"?;:n“n: un t per ro:si:g”:i*urt:?: fri^^rtifH^in ?he ,^trioSs^^::ns “Lirit-i-dnSI development conforms to these requireme'* ts . RURAL RESIDENTIAL - 1 DWELLING PER FIVE ACRE^ Although the typical two P"”\“'n«t^w:st":«n« o? for the entire Rural Service Area, th five acres. The citizens is planned for a lower ?or more intensive rural and in this area have a traditional eunnort the larger quasi-agricultural activities which =“PP“‘^‘„‘5®o„„entalk Minimum lot density. Thus, historic land use and not enviro *’ concerns have determined this land use c CMP 4-28 •r # ^,0, .- CITY OP OKOHO P. O. Box C( Crpxtxl Boy, Ml 55323 473-7357 20N1B6 PILE il77a/1779 BOTICB OP PLMIMIB6 COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: November 23» 1992 90s Andrew Goetten 1385 Fox Street Wayzata, MN 55391 00PIB8 TO:Paul Anderson Nesserlie k Kramer 1500 Northland Plaza 3800 West 80th St. Minneapolis, NN 55431 TTPl OP APPLICATION: Variance Subdivision DATB OP MBBTIBGs 11/16/92 VOTBi 6 For 0 Against PlolUliiig Coonissioa rspn—sndx tho followings Approval subject to conditions noted below, BOtBS ABD SPECIAL COMDlTIOMSs (Chairman Kelley made a joint motion on both applications) 2nd - Bellows NOTION WAS AS FOLLOWS: 1.Approval of subdivision to create a second lot. a* Hardship/justification for approval is the unique action taken by City in Resolution No. 1178 which in Planning Commission's opinion constitutes an agreement by the City to allow this subdivision. 2.The entire parcel must be rezoned to 1-acre zone (in conjunction with City's general rezoning of Minnetonka Bluffs area, to proceed fort^with): the Intent being that even with the required road dedic. ions, lots will be able to meet 1-acre zone standards . 3.Lot 1 wll. septic unt MUSA bounds In outside the sewered area and will be served by h time that MUSA is extended (did not recommend 'ion r however). 4.Septic syst-.i niost be proven for Lot 1. Approval of setback variance for s^rtxc on Lot 1 will be allowed. 5.10' additional right-of-way to be dedicated along south side of Fox Street. 6.Redesign cul-de-sac to meet its pro-rata share (as if a future 1/2 cul-de-sac will also be taken from north side of road). 7.Iraprove/upgrade Fox Street, but cul-de-sac does not have to be improved, only dedicated. A St? ii.i Notice November 23, 1992 Page 2 8.Lot 1 shall access onto Pox Street rather than onto Orono Orchard Road. 9. 10. Dedication of 33* right-of-way for Orono Orchard Road. Dedication of triangular portion of Orono Lane right-of-way that appears from survey to not be dedicated as yet. 11.Applicant to grant conservation and flowage easement over the wetlands. 12.Standard drainage and utility easements to be granted along all lot lines. 13.Payment of park fee for Lot 1 (Park Commission to determine whether any dedication of lands is necessary). 14.City to proceed with accurate replacement of judicial landmark at east end of property. 15.Existing garage, because after 10* road dedication it will encroach into roadway, shall be removed as a condition of the subdivision. 16.Applicant has the option of tying in the lake access parcel (as an outlet) with Lot 1 or Lot 2 (but not both) or may sell said parcel for combination with one of the neighboring properties which adjoin it. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed ast City Council Monday, December 14, 1992; meeting starts at 7t00 p.m. You will be advised of the location of the meeting when location has been confirmed (probably at new City Council Chambers on Old Crystal Bay Road). If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. 7^ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTt:> held NOVEMBER 16. 1992 \ ONR - MAXWELL BAY PUBLIC ACCESS - CONT. pr.c*pltat«d th. Task Forea. jabbour said, "that Is a vary sppd point that « ramambar. and I am vary f>roua of th^a^ 7“,""bn R saa that. Tha doing •"‘^Hiinrcas’rts saff'trom tha LMCO, tha battar thay :???•u*'’^^^^t;7ounci. -i.i p.» rcsrs^ii: rt^a '**'*a r«solutJon by Excelsior will hold water. Ballo«. fait tha ONR should -alt for tha Task Fore, to d.v.lop a process for reviewing potential sites. s;':r . .. j a.-. th« Task Force do their joa in 5:?i;:i^in*g'fira: ^^IsiTaVi*.‘pVkIng spac.s and raviaw aval labia spaces In each rone. Kimball notad this Is th. third task fore, to study this Issua. Kallay notad Orono '» 7 ' u!a^othor*conr^''" J?SC^d°thrtJkrh.v.before the DNR proceeds, the other cojn^^^ oefore the City of Orono to have their like to see a plan In place indicating each ^cSJ;Sun7tres"^r;s;:n7lb «ts fair share. (#2) #1778/1779 ANDREW GOETTEN, PR^imiSAR^ISBoIvlSION/VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 8:12-8:55 P.M. Andr.w Goatten and Paul Anderson, attorney, -are prasant. 8 8 a.N-m>l8r««u*m%.m- fmii-t mill INUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGHELD NOVEMBER 16, 1992 ZONING FILE #1778/1779 - CONT. ISiiiilliil 2 .e^. 'unV.Jir.d, building sit.. R.solutlon .1178 ..tabi ish.d criteria for that division, howavar, tha rasolutlon doas not siggJit hoN to davalop a ona acra pares I v.I thin «J, district. Two options may be by a varianca or by razoning. Tha City Attornay opinas that razoning of tha antira Bluffs araa to standards would not ba considarad spot zoning as it would ba rasidential proparty staying residantial, and ' ^ ^ a sat of rasidantlal standards to propart las that already are davalopad. Ha statad anothar similar situation Is tha Hackbarry Hill araa. Ha notad tha applicant has railed on this Resolution for tha past 12 years to allow tha subdivision of his property. Ha asked what is the City’s obligation to allow this type of subdivision, and if any, under what process. Bel lows asked if they are bound by decisions of a previous Council. Gaffron stated the Attorney has not addressed this *ssua. Ha noted past axpariance indicates actions by a previous Council do not nacassarily bind a present Counci I. Mabusth asked if Gaffron has ever written a resolution such as RasoIution #1178. three acre parcel, and give the property owner some comfort that tha City in the future might allow a subdivision of a 1 acra sewered lot and a 2 acre unsewered lot. Bellows asked about setting a precedent. Gaffron stated they would need to look closely to specific and unique criteria for approval to avoid creating a negative precedent. * ■! .i .1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGHELD NOVEMBER 16, 1992 ZONING FILES #1778/1779 - CONT. f.lt th# resolution implies the subdivision would be He reviewed the unique history of the property: 1. the illttlns wJre^n suVort of the 1980-1 sewer project, and even Goettens were m PP station in the northeast corner rrooertV and 2. they did not appeal the project as others th* area d*d!^He stated his client would prefer the subdivision be Ipprovld as a variance as this would provide a more expedient prccess. Go.tt.n •xplaln.d h« assumed theAd thm Droj6Ct OH the basis that they were 2:irse%" t^7^e^u^rd:r^^s^:p^^%"s•ro^n^re wou?d prefer tr address their decision as a private matter. Bellows stated -ezoning will not solve the Issue of the road. Gatfron concur -d that the road ’’i *1''Jbe granted, and thus a lot area variance would be needed. Schroeder felt the resolution accommodates the subdivision. Rowlette felt they were not Pound by past decisions, and added she wishes to see the area rezoned. Peterson agreed the area should bs rezoned, but ^ '^Jhlobligated by past agreements. He hoped decisions made by the Planning Commission today will be honored In the u ure. Kelley stated he was in favor of rezoning the entire parcel. Gaffron indicated It would be incongruous to .^*Vr t^^ thirds of the property to a one acre zone *7Tne is property. He felt the potential ,7n- Jith th^ feasible, but they need to remember irocess of revisingMetropolitan Council on other issues and the process of revis g the MUSA could be slow. Mabusth felt it would not be wise to grant accommodate the subdivision. a variance to ■ .1 * - « iJi! ^ ...... MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING held NOVEMBER 16, 1992 ZONING FIwES #1778/1779 - CONT. Go#tten asked the Planning Commission s «f He reported'hls entire property is surrounded by right-of He stated the road Is currently 20’ wide and serves ^ There is an additional 10’ available for right-of-way. In 1991, the J??rwor*rd*on t^e road, and U was the City’s time that it was not necessary to "®''the newly created lot could access off Orono Orchard Road. He questioned the necessity of a 100’ diameter cul-de-sac. Bellows agreed that the road may not be required at the width proposed. Kelley asked who would pay for the upgrading to the road. Kelley stated he felt Lot 1 should access onto Fox Street. AM maamhars aareed He felt It unfair that the entire burden of the eul-d.-salbe born by Uo.tten. All members agr.sd.K.llsy a partial cul-de-sae or It ve platted at this time and left undeveI oped. Bellows asked about the potential of developing Fox Street right- of-way to the East. Mabusth indicated that is probably feasible because of the topography. Gaffron noted if Dakota Rail forces the access to the close, there would be an additional residence using the road for access. He indicated standards in the code require a '‘5, to have a 50’ wide right-of-way, paved at a minimum of 28 , ana a cul-de-sac w'th 100’ *^adius. Bellows asked if there alternative to the road. as another acceptable engineering Gaffron stated the City Engineer does not recommend doing anything with Barrett Avenue. Johnson felt the area has limited transportation needs. ZONING FILES tl778/1779 - CONT.£UNirila FAUtw w . • --r It was moved by Kelley. s*""'**^/j;n®*il°GMtten7 1o? Applications #1778 »s 779 for ^ ,0- additional for preliminary ‘''J *! Street redesign of cul-de-sac;?9ht-of-way be dedicated for Fox %ox Street, the to meet a pro-rata share. Lot zoning district, subject?ri^^rcirtUr.s^^^T:ndtl?.^^ ^slVar\;‘■nlrXt^Vev^o':s^rrpp^:«^^^^^^^ >* • agreement.agreement. # --i* Saffron asked if the Commission ' ' asked* I f*they^ Foxo?VriSt*4f-way orchard Roada'^ated rljht- Street « 4,ul re h^r^ of the garase within ?J;ri:i9S^-o -w^Sn-ihl GoStten property.xnax wi ---ef - . o Kelley "ou'l d bV uMrad^^o^the'f tnV rr9hV4*4w/;}£^b » reou l r.^ - s“44'd 'S s:5?nte°d" ar: p?o-?a?:d #;re^ but does not have to be constructed at this time. saffron asked about the parcel with riparian access. e. * i-h*t issue is up to the applicant decide. Kelley stated that issue is uw Vote: Ayes 6, nays 0. f#3) #1780 CITY OF ORONO. 1000 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION Mabusth explained item “oJ®.'*appropriate notices have been sent out. the •^nxt meeting and /9eo I 1 T > ^ I'r-.UF i ^•QRONQjJ C5ity of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO DETElWINniG THAT OHC SANITARY SCNER SCRVXCB WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1385 POX STREET# AND DETERMINING STANDARDS FOR ANT FUTURE SUBDIVISION OF THE PROPERTY WHEREAS# th« City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and • WHEREAS# Sewer Project 80-1 has been initiated by the City to solve existing on-site sewage treatment problems in the Minnetonka Bluffs* West Femdale area# within which the property at 1385 Fox Street# legally described as Government Lot 3 northwest of Great Northern Railroad right- of-way excluding road and the west 33 feet of Lot 3 south of Wayzata and Spring Park Road# is located; and WHEREAS# the property at 1365 Pox Street has an area of approximately 3.60 acres and contains an existing residential dwelling; and WHEREAS# it is likely that present and/or future on-site sewage treatment problems at 1385 Fox Street can be solved through the use of on-site sewage treatzient systems# and therefore the property*has bean considered for inclusion in the 80-1 project at the owner's optioni-and WHEREAS#: the o%mer has indicated a preference that, a single^ sewer service be provided for the existing house with any new lot created by future subdivision to be served by an on-site sewage treatment system# THEREFORE# BE IT RESOLVED# by the City Council of the City of Orono# that one sewer service stub be provided to serve the existing residence located at 1385 Fox Street with the following provisions: 1. Any future subdivision of the property must leave not less than one acre for the existing residence. 2. Any new building site which might be created will comply with all current zoning regulations at the time of subdivision# the intent of this provision b^ing that any new lot created in the future is not intended, to be served by the 80-1 sewer project but is intended to fully comply with all City on-site sewage treatssent requirements. Therefore there is benefit to the property fren the construction .of the sewer to the extent of one unit. PAGE _OF City of OROINO RESOIUTION orTHiCITVCOUNaL na 112L__ ORONO day of Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on the August , 19t0. ATTEST: ty Adninis tr a tor The undersigned owner (s) of the above described property has read the terns of this Resolution and agrees to be bound by the terns thereof. V- r Property Ovmer Date Property Owner Date PAGE 2_OP __2 It M ■ i. 1 * -mApril 7, 1980 Mr. Alan Olson, City Planner City of Orono Orono City Offices 1335 S. Brown Road Orono, MN 55391 Dear Alan: This letter is an attempt to respond to the recent questionnaire on a sewer project affecting the Minnetonka Bluffs and Orono Lane areas. It is addressed to you in view of our recent discussions on the matter at your office and, subsequently, by telephone. We are in favor of a municipal sewer project to serve our residence at 1385 Fox Street, but our approvcl of the project follows the lines of our discussion in your office. As you know, our total lot size is approximately 3 2/3 acres. It is divided with a portion of that area lying generally south of County Road 15 and running down to the lake with this area being a non-bv’.ildable lot site. The major portion of our lot lies in a triangular piece north of County Road 15 and is bounded by County Road 15 on Che south and east, Orono Orchard Road on the west and Fox Street on the north. We understand chat this triangular portion is approximately three acres. V7e iinderstand that the present sewer proposal for the Minnetonka Bluffs area lying directly to the north of our lot envisions a pimping station to be placed on our main lot for which the Village is requesting a consideration free easement of approximately 85* x 50’. We estimate that our residence lies approximately 200 feet west of the proposed pumping station and easement site. As you know, we have proposed that our residence be included as a unit in the.proposed Minnetonka Bluffs area sewer project and this would require that our hookup would run the approximate 200 feet from the house to the pumping station site. Because of this private connection distance, we have . s . f t 1*4 ’.V n i: II •Apirl 7. Page 2proposed that the City run their stub-in fo. our individual connection to the outside line of their ieouested easement. We certainly want to stress that damage to existing trees and brush be held to an absolute minimum and. obvilusly. that existing be unimpaired or accurately replaced. j bel^ve^that the road and sewer work along Orono Orchard Road this past year has caused our southwest boundary M?ker U be buried). Also. because the pumping station Site is much closer to two of our neighbors than it is to us. we request that sufficient screen planting be included in the project so that the station is not noticeable. In addition, we propose that our triangular Pie=* b* divided for the purposes of this sewer project and that the western two acres of the piece be acknowledged as a buildable two acre site without sewer connection. You know of our concern regarding the indications of w?itMragreements "preeluling any added f«ure sewer connections” and we assume, at this time, that an agreement suitable to both the Village be worked out. However, let us reiterate that it seem to US tha** vour concerns in this regard can be controlled by the City itself in its toning and we (>e.>erhly feel that it's highly undesirable to be nlactnc restrictive agreetnents on this ground which would be extremely difficult to remove under changed circumstances at a future time. Most noteworthy, as you know, the western portion of our main triangular lot J-J*® Orono Orchard Road where, as we understand ® j trunk pressurized line is now in existence. We understand, also that the City is not allowing present private individual connection to this trunk line, but this seems us an obvious place where a variety of pressures could causa a different City position in the future. me. Very truly yours, Andrew J. Goetten AJG:vad Li iTlif-iTf ■ ii ii* sIi•V. ‘to u,. -CII . * ‘ip- U,. -‘J I 4?^f April 13. 1981 Mr. Walter R. Benson City Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota Dear Dick: 55323 I am enclosing for your attention Certificate of Title No. 50555, dated May 21, 1974 certifying the ownership of the • 1385 Fox Street property in Diann and myself as joint tenants. As you know, this certificate is needed to record the (sewer) easement which Diann and I grated the City last fall. As you know, we are troublecL-fey^he outcome of the sewer proceedings as it affecta-.^tts-'^idthis transmittal has been held up by that as Hfili-iS’the fact that communication with the City's legal _ _ _,1 has been impossible in our view. We have been addressed by letter (with copies to you and the City Council) on a mix of things which we do not understand, and what we do understand we don't like. On the part o.f their communications we don't understand, let me say that the easement we granted included the wording "under and over the premises". If two documents are required for recording in this regard, one For the under and the other for the over, then at this point it is our feeling"that your counsel can draft the second document in identical to the instrument we gave to accomplish this recording need. We did not execute your_ "scandard city form" because we felt you and your contracting agents were responsible for exercising a reasonable degree of care while on our property for any purpose and this was stated in our grant, as well as the requirement for screen replanting of the facility upon project completion. We felt it would be obvious that if did not care to execute one "standard city format", we would n.>t execute a second for recording or any other purpose. In regard to their communications we do not like, let me say that we are both damn angry at insinuations of lack of cooperation in the totality of this project. It is true to say we are not happy with it at this time, but you know that we were supportive in all the early canvassing and public hearings on the matter. We have Mr. Walter R. Benson April 13, 1981 Page 2 recompense in providing a location for the pumping facilities and the extent of these facilities which now include an above ground circuit shed have grown from the original descriptions. We made no requirement on where our connection po^nt would lie and this has become more distant than original indications. Neighborhood information and City Council minutes we see have pretty well filled us in on other private monetary arrangements. Having said the above and at the risk of being over long, let me say that we did of course request the ability to split our nearly 4 acres. The City Council agreed to this apparently with a reluctance that we can not understand. The Council specifies a 2 acre lot for the portion not served by sewer, which is the present common Orono requirement; with a one acre requiretnent for the site served by sewer. This is a big valuable concession in the Minnetonka Bluffs area where the average lot size is close to one-half acre? Finally, I have to say that we still really can't believe an assessment outcome that leaves ourselves and perhaps four others with unit assessments about 50^ in excess of those fixed for a group who protested this improvement. We know Lhe Council group works hard and is honest in its efforts, but this outcome certainly acts to promote protest activity and certainly penalizes those who try to cooperate. It's a sad conclusion to our initial feeling of wanting to help really improve the area pd the lake. Our delivery of the Title Certificate at this time is simply to fulfill our earlier given word. Please have it returned to us at your earliest convenience and please also acknowledge its receipt by signing and returning the enclosed copy of this letter. Andrew J. AJG:vad cc: Mayor Brad Van Nest I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED CERTIFICATE OF TITLE NO. 50555: DAT -// / i \ CITY OF ORONOJ CITY of ORONO Post OfTic* Bos 66«CrysUl Bay. MinncaoU 55323•Municipal OfficM On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka April 23, 1981 Mr. Andrew J. Goetten 1385 Fox Street Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Dear Mr. Goetten: During ray years of dealing with municipal se%rer and water projects, I have received many conqplaints concerning public hearings, assessments, and construction and cleanup procedures. Many of the complaints are valid and each and everyone has to be followed up. your letter of April 13, 1981 is possibly one of the raost difficult to understand, not because of not being able to separate problems you have had with your sewer project, but because of we apparent frustration and lack of communication you apparently have had throughout the project. If the City is guilty of %rrong*“doing, it is simply that we did everything in our power to communicate to each and every property owne- atten^ting to keep them infor^d of what the City was doing. There has never in the history of any Orono, where there has been so many public hearings and . tion meetings held, so many notices and letters mailed, and neighborhood meetings attended attempting to resolve each and every concern. Yes, we did beat the project to death. One major problem occurs when legal matters dominate any public project, everyone becomes pareuioid and attempt to cover all bases and, of course, this is impossible. believe it or not, I admire their honesty. Your situation was unique in that you ovm 3^0 acres; ^5“ ^ end of your project area and you chose not to be one of the appellants within the Minnetonka Bluffs area. ?hrap^llSnt'mttS®2M''MSoiJed°th?oSgh^ieglti«tiin ’^for those that BUILDING a Z0N1N<; - 473-7J57 \ssf.ssim: administration a finance - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 jk____ Mr. Andrew J. Gotten April 23, 1981 Page 2 total project cost is lower than anticipated costs, the City Council will consider reducing the remaining resident assessments. Keep in mind, each area is a separate project and stands on its o%m merits. Concerning your concern regarding the City Council's apparent reluctance to split your nearly four acres, it is obvious the City Council was not willing to create densities below average lot size when this below average lot size prevelant in your area was what was causing on-site problems in a rural area. The City Council did assess you one unit only, at your request, singly because a.iy future subdivision requested by you was to create a lot that would be served by an on-site system, not municipal sewer, which was your desire when this question was asked of you at our public meetings. 1 enclose Resolution #1178 for your information. I have requested Bruce Malkerson, our lead City Attorney, to address your other concerns regarding legal counsel matters. His Xetter to you should be received by you this week. My experience in these matters is that the City is always accused of attempting to avoid its responsibilities when a project as you are experiencing X® constructed. We try to corTi'.unicate and eliminate any possible miscommunications. Andrew, we tried to communicate with you, Xetters were sent, phone calls vmre made, we attenqpted to contact you every way possible but until now, we never received from you any acknowledgement of our attempts to clarify these issues with you. Thank you for your Certificate of Title #50555. Call me when you are available and we can discuss these matters further. Sincerely, Walt^ R. Benson Citj^^dministrator Enclosure TO:Walter R. Benson FROM: DATE: Alan P. Olson July 10, 1981 SUBJECT: David Duff, 1420 Shoreline Drive The Duff property apparently contains about 2.9 acres of land, enough for one residence in the rural area per RR-lB zoning. The MUSA line as legally defined by Resolution iJo. 1134 in April 1930 excluded all the areas later approved for sewer in 1980 including Minnetonka Bluffs, Nest Ferndale and Orono Lane, not just the marina area. This exclusion was based on the existing situation in April. It had no bearing on leaving the Marina or Duff property in or out of the project. That decision was based on the need for service and the potential for per­ manent on-site systems on each property. Mr. Duff is requesting 2 units. His existing hous<- does have problems but they could be resolved on-site on the two 4- acres. With 2 units, the implication is service for a new lot to be subdivided off. This could not occur under the existing zoning because he has less than 4 acres. It would seem reasonable that sanitary sewer might be a cost- effective option to repair of the existing septic system. To provide it for that purpor;e would be consiste*.with our CMP. To provide it for new urban development in the rural area is not. To subdivide the 2.9 acres into 2 units would either require a lot area variance or a rezoning to LR-IB or some similar 1 acre designation. This has not been done for the other areas that received sewer in 1980. The Goetten property for comparison has 3.6 acres and was served with 1 unit for the existing house. In that case Council indicated they may look favorably on a future subdivision into one 1 acre sewered parcel and one 2 acre unsewered rural parcel. This type of split is not possible on the Duff pro­ perty because it is less than 3 acres. Considering the zoning and the Duff lot area, if more than 1 unit is to be considered at all I suggest that we also include and study the adjacent Gregory property. This would include all land to the Railroad Road tracks. Gregory also has a lakeshore house with septic problems needing repair. 1rage 2The existing sewer project is-99% complete. There is no service to the Duff property. There is a manhole in the center of the Born lot. Service from here to the Duff house woul reguire installation of a new stub into the manhole.* includ...ig a new easement from Born. If two units were provided, the main would have to be extended with (likely) several manholes and new easements. Consistent with our CMP and past C'^v. icil decisions on other projects I feel there are two opti 'ns in this situation: 1. Leave the Duff property rural and repair the septic system on-site. 2.Provide 1 sewer stub for the existing house leaving the designation as 2 acre rural': This would require prepayment of all assessments and refunding of excess shares (if any) to the other property ov.iers in the project. JiTo: From: Date: Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator November 6, 1992 Subject: #1779 Andrew Goetten, 1385 Fox Street - Preliminary Subdivision ~ Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-lB, Single family rural residential, 2 acre minimum lot size Application: Subdivision to create a second building site from 3-plus acre homestead parcel List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Staff Sketch Exhibit P - Engineers Recommendations 11-3-92 Exhibit G - Basis for Right-of-Way Dedication Requirement Ejtk'.UI't N - Ca^/aUsc.. Summary of Request The applicant proposes to subdivide this approximately 3 acre parcel into a 1—acre sewered lot and a 2 —acre unsewered lot. While the merits of the 2-acre/l-acre concept are discussed in a separate memo for Application fi773, this subdivision review is based on the premise that either through a variance or rezoning, the 2-acre/l-acre split is conceptually feasible. Propezrty Data Gross Area North of Railroad - Less 33' Orono Orchard Road R.O.W. Net Area North of Railroad: - Less Designated Wetlands; Net Contiguous Dry Buildable; Area South of County Road 15; 3.42 ac - .31 ac 3.11 ac - .10 ac 3.01 ac 0.24 ac After Recommended As Proposed Fox St Dedications Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot Area (Net)2.01 ac 1.00 ac 1.86 ac 0.92 ac Lot Width fF<’X St)217' +470* +300' +490' + Front Setback —46.6'—35' + (Existing House) Zoning File #1779 November 6, 1992 Page 2 Lakeshore Strip This property is the remnants of the underlying "Government Lot 3" and contains a 0.24 acre, 33* wide strip of land leading to Browns Bay, and is separated from the main parcel by County Road 15 and the Dakota Rail right-of-way. Staff recommends that this strip be platted as an outlet, and be designated for ownership with Lot 1 or Lot 2. Alternatively, it could be designated for sale to an adjacent property only. In either case, the City will request additional right-of-way for a triangular portion of Orono Lane. Septic System Requirements Septic system testing has been provided to indicate that, absent any additional road dedications, primary and alternate drainfields can be developed under City and State codes to serve a 5 bedroom house on the 2 acre, unsewered parcel. However, if additional right-of-way for Fox Street is required (see discussion), this would result in a zero setback between the mound systems and the right-of-way instead of the required 20' setback. The applicant was advised of this as soon as the Engineer's recommendation was received, but chose to not provide additional testing to show how such a right-of-way dedication might be accommodated, on the basis that he opposes any dedication of additional right-of-way. The site evaluator has verbally indicated to staff that the right-of-way dedication would likely force the use of a site with slopes in the range of 8%, a variance from the • •^tic code maximum of 6%. Staff would note that the applicant s ^>^rveyofr was advised that if drainfield sites required a slo^e a'/iance, we would request topography of the entire parcel as -2 ins to review all other possibilities. NDSA Boundary The MUS/» boundary currently is located 330' east of the center line of Orono Orchard Road, placing the existing asidence within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area, the westerly portion of the property being outside the MUSA line. Sewer Availability The existing residence at 1385 Fox Street was provided with municipal sewer as part of the 1980 — 1 "Minnetonlca Bluffs project, and is connected to the sewer. A municipal lift station serving the Bluffs area and Woodhill Country Club exists at the easterly tip of the property on an easement. The survey suggests that the control panel for the lift station may be encroaching past the easement boundary, althoucjh no dimension for such encroachment is provided on the survey. Applicant notes that the Zoning File #1779 November 6, 1992 Page 3 Judicial Marker at the east corner was removed when the sewer was installed and the City should have it accurately replaced. City Council Resolution No, 1178 determined that only one sewer unit would be provided to the property^ and indicated that a future subdivision would create a 1 acre sewered parcel with the existing house and a 2 acre unsewered lot to the west. The MUSA boundary was later placed (somewhat arbitrarily) to reflect the directives of that i-r,*.olution. There is no provision within the project area for a direct service stubb for the west half of the property. Provision of sewer to the west parcel would require a MUSA amendment and Council approval. The connection charge for the Minnetonka Bluffs Project is currently $8,991.00 per unit. The options for physically making such a connection would appear to be either a 300-400' long gravity line through the east lot to the lift station; an extension of the existing line up Barrett Avenue and west along Fox Street (would be extremely deep); or construction of an individual injector station into the MWCC forcemain in Orono Orchard Road (would require MWCC approval, would be expensive). Existing and Proposed Setbacks, Lot 2 Proposed Lot 2 contains an existing house, shed, and garage. The existing garage near Fox Street is intended to be removed. The existing shed technically is nearer the front lot line (Fox Street) than the existing residence. The house is 46.6' from the north lot line where a 50' setback would be required for any new construction. The proposed dividing line leaves the existing house approximately 48' from the side lot line (30' required). The ramifications of widening the right-of-way and providing a cul-de-sac are discussed below. Additional Right-of-Way for Fox Street Rec nded Please review the City Engineer's recommendation (letter dated November 3, 1992), Fox Street is a 30' wide platted corridor, containing a 20' grcvel road surface extending approximately 320' eastward from the Orono Orchard Road right-of- way. Fox Street is not developed east of its intersection with undeveloped Barrett Avenue. The City Engineer is recommending that an additional 20' of right-of-way be granted from the Goetten property in addition to a cul-de-sac located mostly within the Goetten property. He is further recommending that the abutting and neighboring property owners who gain access from Fox Street (which is currently I !■' I 1 I Zoning File #1779 November 6, 1992 Page 4 maintained by the City) be assessed equal amounts for the improvements which would include pavement to a 28* width and an 80' paved diameter cul-de-sac. lapact of Additional Right-of-way Request Dedication of additional right-of-way for road and cul-de- sac has the impact of reducing the area of both Lots 1 and 2. Lot 1 reduces from 2.01 acres dry buildable to 1.86 acres dry buildable. Lot 2 decreases from 1.00 acre dry buildable to 0.92 acre dry buildable^ although credit for Flood Fringe might increase this to 0.96 acre. Further, the dedicated cul-de-sac as sketched by the Engineer would be approximately 35' from the existing residence on Lot 2, where 50' is required in the RR-IB zone, and would require extensive filling to the rear of the existing garage. Moving the cul-de-sac 15' west to yield the proper house setback would leave only a 10' setback to the drainfield sites. Finally, the additional 20' of right-of-way has a significant impact on the alternate tested drainfield site, which would now abut the new right-of-way rather than maintaining the required 20' setback. Additional testing has not been provided to verify whether drainfield sites could be developed while maintaining appropriate setbacks. The Community Management Plan considers Orono Orchard Road as a "Scenic Parkway", requiring a 50-66' right-of-way, and this portion of Fox Street as a "Local Street" requiring a 50' - 60* right-of-way. Since applicant's ownership is to the centerline of Orono Orchard Road, it was suggested that something less than 33' be dedicataed for it. A 17' dedication would leave 16' x 410* = 0.15 acre within Lot 1, just about offsetting the Fox Street dedications (Engineer would have to determine whether City needs all 33', only 17', or something in between, although 33* would be a consistent requirement). Road Dedication Considerations Planning Commission should consider the following questions: Given the potential impact of development of a cul-de- sac and widened roadway, is there justification to grant area variances to the 1 acre/2 acre requirements in order that this property can be subdivided? Absent an upgrade of Fox Street to City standards, should the City continue to maintain this section of Fox Street as a public roadway? Zoning Pile #1779 November 6, 1992 Page 5 If in fact the proposed driveway access for the new Lot 1 is to Orono Orchard Road, is there justification to argue that since no new properties will be serviced by the existing Fox Street, right-of-way for Fox Street should be dedicated but the road improvements not be required? Are there any unique characteristics of this subdivision which suggest that road dedication and improvement would be inconsistent or inappropriate? Staff Rei: ci—eniliition Clearly, for this subdivision to work will require trade­ offs, i.e. if full road and cul-de-sac dedication are required, lot area and setback variances may be necessary. Any recommendation for preliminary plat approval would have to include the following Items: 0 Require right-of-way dedication for Orono Orchard Road: 33' 17' Other (staff recommends 33') J 2.Require right-o way dedication Barrett Avenue: ___ 20' ___ recommends 20') for Fox Street east to 0* Other (staff V 3.Require cul-de-sac dedication for Fox Street: Full None Other (staff recommends Full) /4.Require improvement of Fox Street and cul-de-sac: Yes No (staff recommends Yes) If no, should City continue to maintain gravel road? Yes No 5.Approval of variances to 2 acre/1 acre area and setback standards as necessary to accommodate required road dedications. 6. 7. 8. Flowage and Conservation Easement over wetlands. Standard Drainage and Utility Easements along lot lines. Park Fee for Lot 1 - Park Commission to review, determine if need for dedication of lands. 9.Lot 1 access to Orono Orchard Road at location determined by City Engineer, address to be XXXX Orono Orchard Road, Fox becomes a side street for Lot 1. Zoning File #1779 November 6» 1992 Page 6 10. City to proceed with replacement of Judicial Landmark at east end. 11.Removal of existing garage, and advise reolacement of garage in location north of north line of house will require a future variance. 12.Designate lakeshore strip as Outlet A: Attach to Lot 1 for riparian access ^ - - Attach to Lot 2 for riparian access / ^ ^ _ Declare only for future sale to adjacent landowner.0<— 13. Dedication of triangular portion of Orono Lane A recommendation for preliminary plat «PP^°^®^^ have to address the additional septic testing/topographic survey work needed if all road dedications are required. Isv 4 I iiVittii rr ^ •* r- •*» # 4 ‘ I• '< CITY OP OROHO - SUBDIVISIOH APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address_ _ _ _1385 Fox Street, Orono> Minnesota 55391_ _ _ _ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 02-177-23 34 0001 Please check one - Property _ _ abstract or _^ torrens? V r f ' i 01 iiEti 350. OC CHECK Ti 525.00 HECEiPr-TH^K YOU ^2S63S0 COOi ROl TIU 10/23/ Attach legal description to application. See Exhibit A APPLICANT Phone (home) 473-6633 Name Andrew J. Coetten Phone (work) n/a Address: 1385 Fox Street City:Orono Zip; 55391 OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address: _ _ _ _ __ City; (attach list if more than one) Zip: EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Sire 3.6 3.6 Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check)Residential? no. of units Other (specify)_ _ _ _ _ _ Present Zoning District RR-1B PROP<JSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites:1 Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density:Units per 3.6 Acres Minimum Lot Size:see Plat Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use; (check)Residential Other (specify) * See accompanying Variance Application ?5.0CYOU,Til: )/23/ ^‘ CITY OP ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION /• — — — — — — — — — — —PROPERTY LOCATION T' i ./Site Address 1385 Fox Street, Orono, Minnesota 55391 ' iA w’w'Vfc. WW'V*i rrvVA VUltProperty Identification Number (P.I.D.) 02-177-23 34 0001Please check one - Property _ _ _ abstract or _ _^ torrens?rurr-rLrl iuut\T* lAijzrrTDr.TUAi/Y vniI fiiniTtS I u’V VT^k/Ww ‘W*V UWA llvi I Jiitvi Attach legal description to application. See Exhibit A APPLICANT Name Phone (heme)473-6633 Andrew J. Goetten Phone (work ) n/a Address ; 1385 Fox Street _________ OIINER (if different than applicant) City:Orono Zip: 55391 Phone (home) Neune Phone (work) Address:City;Zip: (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USB Number of Tax Parcels _ _ _]_ _ _ Development Size 3.6 3.6 Present Use (check) Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential? no. of units _1 Other (specify)_ _ _ _ ___ _ _ Present Zoning District RR-1B PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites; Proposed Gross Density: it Minimtim Lot Size: Proposed Use; (check) see plat Existing Units New Units Total Units Units per 3.6 Acres Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify)_____________ See accompanying Variance Application k' > »• I f* fj A ••If • t /F •it It ocano -M2L (*7) 'Sf \lOf 15. BLOCK I? HP»<T c >#a aUfS DICKENSON t ► a M " V —»—■ - R (»?)■ **f u ^ K * ^ ■ * ft1(4) ^ I ' > r <;R At '' • '-'j rjT ’► >" '•(6) I ?<*'> *1' ► '•(m iw' R ^.5 " (10) j?'/» T5 "( «f ;6)J« R n . Si ff 1 n f ■ R f (46) • ^ (i?) '4t a (13) 1 ft , 1 ' (»4)ft . J ft • ^ft i ( I5>i ft * ; 7: ’ft ^ • ( 16)ft • (in ft > ’•ft II :( 16)ft -T^ \t9 JS ft •t9 4t ;o t(ff •% j3iL ■ H*' : UJ > < •*C If « M , i *;4 •% r^' ' V t J (40) ^ —to.;^ * Sg t i J ", *y ^ .1 p% z it - ( ISO’ 4-- - - - 4 360V---^ HILL (SM)m»?wcT \ioi 15. aoo I?WI»t€T0MiA ai^FS 1 dUD *h .. -*•/**‘.T. *V.. i; • . . .. ■ • »a R ” v( M) " »?377 J H3W'— \ ^ * (4*6) |pl !• %• ' B B **" (?5)« a IT " (??)\.*«i • ■ (21)® fl(17) * ■ (20)V «• * ■ '*^( rat • ** « •( *JI) r“iTT Ifitx T» rJTio) 1^KA6@K11FILV <•«' mi RUN 6RTC 10/l«/92 eATCN 002 HEftCPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OMCRS LISTPROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR f I 50 02-117-25 51 OOOA 005SO ORONO ORCHARD RO S LANRENCE E NELSON LAHRENCE E NELSON 550 ORONO ORCHARD RO S NAYZATA MN 55S91 PROP AOOR 0»0«R NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 50 02-117-25 51 0009 01500 • FOX sr — HEROERT D MEYER HERBERT 0 HEYER BOX 12 NAYZATA m 55391 PROP AOOR OWCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 50 02-117-25 51 0015 00557 HANLON AVE R V A N E KOEHNEN ROBERT I MICHEL KOEHNEN 557 HANLON AVE NAYZATA HN 55591 PROP AOOR 0»0CR NAME TAXPAYER ‘ NANE/AODR 01500 FOX ST - R A K TSCHIOA ROBERT 6 TSCHIOA 1500 FOX ST NAYZATA Ml 55591 PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOORr 50 02-117-25 51 0021 01500 FOX ST STATE LAND DEPT DRAPER M A NOLLY D JAFFRAY 590 BARRETT AVE NAYZATA MN 55591 r r PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER • NAHE/AOOR 5B 02-117-25 51 0026 00559 KEENE AVE O HARALO ERIKSEN O HARALO ERIKSEN A219 ZEALAND AVE N HPLS MN 55926 r 56 0>-117-25 51 000700056 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO ROGER ' HAMCINSON ROGER J HAHKINSON 570 ORONO ORCHARD RO NAYZATA Ml 55591 56 02-117-25 51 0010 01590 FOX ST EOHARO H KAMI EONARO H HAHN 906 ST PETER ST ST PAUL MN 55102 56 32-117-25 51 OOU 00595 HANLON AVE HAOASSAH YEHUOIT ZOHARA HAOASSAH YEHUOIT ZOHARA 565 HANLON AVE NAYZATA MN 55591 36 02-117-25 51 0019 01590 FOX ST BETTY J STINSON BETTY J STINSON 1590 FOX ST NAYZATA Ml 55591 56 02-117-25 51 0022 00590 BARRETT AVE 0 H JAFFRAY A N B JAFFRAY DRAPER M JAFFRAY 590 BARRETT AVE NAYZATA Ml 55591 58 02-117-25 31 0029 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO T A A 6 N FISCHER THEODORE A GERTRUDE FISCHER 2059 COItlERCE BLVD MOUND Ml 55569 REPORT NO. PI935901 PAGE 658 02-117-25 51 0008 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO ROGER J HAMCINSON ROGER J HAMLINSON 570 ORONO ORCHARD RO NAYZATA MN 55391 38 02-117-25 51 0011 00570 ORONO ORCHARD RO S ROGER J HAMCINSON ETAL ROGER J HAMLINSON 570 ORONO ORCHARD RO NAYZATA Ml 55591 1 58 02-117-25 51 0017 00056 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO HAOASSAH YEHUOIT ZOHARA HAOASSAH YEHUOIT ZOHARA 565 HANLON AVE ORONO Ml 55591 56 02-117-23 31 0020 . . 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO H 0 MEYER ETAL H 0 HEYER BOX 12 NAYZATA MN 55591 arr* 36 02-117-25 31 0023 00590 BARRETT AVE 0 M JAFFRAY A N B JAFFRAY DRAPER N JAFFRAY 590 BARRETT AVE NAYZATA HN 55591 38 02-117-25 31 0030 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO JACK C BURCH JACK C A MARION BURCH 6572 NHITE OAK DR LINO LAKES MN 55056 ■ i M.- -ff-fc -T1 RUN DATC 10/14/92 ^4 i-.k. ' ■ M:- OATCN 002RROO AOOR Olt€R NAME TAXPAYER HAHi/MDR »■> •• PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR L < PROP ADOR Olt€R NAME TAXPAYER HAHE/ADOR PROP AOOR QHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP AOOR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR r PROP AOOR QHNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR SO 02-117-2S SI 0031 00030* ADDRESS UNASSIONED JACK C A HARION BURCH JACK C A HARION BURCH 4572 NHITE OAK OR UNO LAKES MN 55056 30 02-117-23 31 0054 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIOIED STATE LAND DEPT CITY Of ORONO DRAINAGE A CONSERVATION 2-10-09 ST DEED B17109S 30 02-117-25 51 0044 00540 BARRETT AVE 0 H JAfFRAY A H B JAFFRAY DRAPER H JAFFRAY 540 BARRETT AVE HAY2ATA* MN 55591 30 02-117-23 S3 0010 01410 SHORELINE DR A HARRISON AIL HARRISON ALFRED A INGRID L HARRISON 1410 SHORELINE DR NAY2ATA HN 55591 30 02-117-23 54 0005 01509 ORONO LA HENRY N SEE ETAL HENRY N SEE 1509 ORONO LA NAYZATA HN 55591 50 02-117-23 34 0000 01399 ORONO LA ELIZABETH N NORTON ELIZABETH N NORTON 1399 ORONO LA* NAYZATA MN 55591 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY IMFORtfATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST30 02-117-23 31 0032 00050 A00REr^« UNASSIGNEO T A A G H FISCilER THEODORE A GERTRUDE FISCHER 2054 COrt€RCE BLVO HOUND MN 55564 REPORT NO. PI455401 PAGE 7 50 02-117-25 31 0035 00050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED T A A 6 M FISCHER THEODORE A GERTRUDE FISCHER 2054 COftlERCE BLVD HOUND MN 55564 30 02-117-23 32 0001 00405 ORONO ORCHARD RD EDHARD H HAHH EDHARD HERSEY HAHH 400 ST PETER ST ST PAUL HN 55102 30 02-117-c* 53 0011 01401 SHORELINE OR EDHARD H A JEAN HAftl EDHARD H A JEAN HATtl 400 ST PETER ST ST PAUL HN 55102 50 02-117-25 54 0006 01595 ORONO LA NORNEST BK HPLS-NTL ASC TRST NORUEST BANK HN TRUST REAL ESTATE 6TH A MARQUETTE MPLS MN 55479-0053 50 02-117-25 54 0010 ' 01265 SHORELINE DR L S BUSCH AHA BUSCH LEONARD A MARGARET BUSCH 1265 SHORELINE DR NAYZATA m 55591 50 02-117-23 51 005300050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED CEDRIC OETTLOFF CEDRIC OETTLOFF 1255 DICKENSON ST NAYZATA HN 55591 50 02-117-25 51 0056 00050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO T A A G A FISCHER THEODORE A GERTRUDE FISCHER 2054 COMMERCE BLVO HOUND HN 55564 30 02-117-23 33 0002 01465 FOX ST SALUS REAL ESTATE INC SALUS REAL ESTATE INC C/0 GRATR) METROPOLITAN 200 6TH ST S MS 10H7 HPLS HN 55402 30 02-117-23 34 0001 01505 FOX ST ANDREH J GOETTEN A NIFE ANOREN J GOETTEN 1505 FOX ST NAYZATA HN 55591 30 02-117-23 34 0007 01597 ORONO LA DANA H NELLS DATU H HELLS 1597 ORONO LA NAYZATA MN 55391 30 02-117-23 34 0011 01525 SHORELINE DR TIMOTHY R DUOOS TIMOTHY R DUOOS 1525 SHORELINE DR NAYZATA HN 55591 f •J • •* ■ j RUN DATE 10/lA/n hemiepin county property information systemPROPERTY OHNERS LIST REPORT NO. PIA55401 PAGE e»ATCH 002PROP ADOR OHNER NA»« TAXPAYER NAME/AODR SO 02-117-2S SA 0012 01S55 shoreline dr 0 A H JOHNSONDOUGLAS 0 A MARY M JOHNSON 1S55 SHORELINE DR NAYZATA 55S91 SO 02-117-25 001501505 SHORELINE OR N J POPP ATE POPP HILLIAM J a TERI E POPP 1505 SHORELINE DRIVE NAYZATA »W 55591 58 02-117-25 A1 0009 00058 AOORESS IMASSIGNEO MCLEOD CNTY REG RAIL AUTH DAKOTA RAIL INC 25 ADAMS ST N HUTCHINSON ttl 55550 L PROP ADOR C»MER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR TOTAL BATCH 002 00059 i ,9) r : • r 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS 5f hJnNEPI^^^ department of PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KrJOHLEOGE AND BELIEF. /•utt) DATE F ic|i‘)ll.> .V '^Q\ r r r f r f -J report W. PIft55401 PAGE 0 '~Zi 0009 lORESS UMASSIGNEO rv REG RAIL AUTH [L INC 5T N H Itl 55350 n and true kTE ON THE RECORDS riON» TO THE BEST \ % V \*\ » r ■ CO r PREUMNARY PLAT FOR ANDREW J. GOETTEN IN QOVT. U)T 3. SECTION 2-117-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 4«m«. ^ T /*»!♦*^€904$ A-s* I.f9t4C nrti /■<!•##*»* 99*09 040^00 00^0440 4040 440 €0ttm4pm€ 4004 r4r4 4 0414 '4k/ 4-0fk 044 r 2 f #/ ! 4C 0» t t»4>4»k't 0404'0 04f 4440 44»0 i>944)g f.t't 40 A414 /** t0k4,0 940r . 9 24 9 4140/ '0«0»I0 BXISTINO l,ECAL PB8C«I>TI0lft Thai p«rt cT Ul a, SidioB f, TWvBi^ 117 North* Unco ».W«I rf Um 5thPri»clpalMtddl«i*aaMibidaa&Um: Coaainring at Iha HothwiN cmar or Lot a ataMatf aod foaolaf Ihfloea Batl 790 fm la Iba Nvtharif Uaa oo iida ol right cl wag of tha liiaoMoka Biaadh if tha Qiaot Nvthn Railway; thaaca SoolkwMtalj ikof thi Hvthstg liaa M itda if «M right 5!yJ? tor JiriidbllMiitgiailrayhnrtgltWNarikwcataMaaraaathaNarthagil eoroar. laaaacllarir. if iiU ttail af laad. c?ril at a palat hi tha Waalwiy Uaa lar.asdtharoof I8M Ihd Soath il^ iili ILia fraib taid Nacihwiit«|y Thla auraay iatapda to ahow tha locatton of ail aaisting. baildinaa In ralhtiofi to tha boondariaa of tha abova daocribad proparty. It'.dbaa not purport to ahow ai\y '^thar , iaprovawanta or ancroaobwanta*. o I iroa warhar fouod* a I Judloiat iandwarh Baarinfi ahawa ara baaad upon an aaouwad datua 4n4/4/fr90^4r4 a 44»i*mmi0t 90^*000 Cmt* 000 S09ttf _1_ <0I V ^ fiSo :5 1' ' p1iWO c 1 1#ev \f u «»c^ CliSTlNft **c.j:®''** « f-SoO"-———i3tir-«* ■■ ■;j«^;r.-. . -V?-:/v"-"^-^-vw,^L.-,;.: 7////////Mff///M^^^ \ ^ 1 V 5K6Ttrt '■^> A'>‘>inoA/Ai- g.oMTD 8€ PetiicA-Tist^ C\ry (^co^i^ie/^v>Aenot^ (O.IS^^ 10 Ur /) ^ 0 <00 /Vc /^J 2 ^ 7Vr>«i ^ ASMt s t^<. £te^ti0»^9 0A0^^ 00t0**^ 14C S0^r4f AJir z A.24tM<Sfr !%o m Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Otto G 3onesnx3 PE fiooen W PE • C PE L Scr-wd a PE Pcf^aro E '^urntf PE P Cook PE Thomas E \ov^s PE PoC^'T G Sc ’^uh-cht Susan M £rof«n C PA •Srnof Ccnsu«tant Engineers & Architects *-*ov\an3 A Sanfo-'d PE kr tn A Gordon PE Pcce'T P PE P . •'jfd A ro'te' PE Cavd C Lcskcta p£ Pccert c Pussek A i A Je"> A Bourdon P£ \*jr^ A »-j"son P£ Vender T Raumann P£ "«J »c Fow PE Thomas R Anoe'VOn A i A Ocnao C Bu'gjrcjt P£ Thomas £ Angus. P£ ismaer Wartir»e2 PE Mchae* P Pau P£ Agres V Ping A i C P T»*c'^a5 NA Prte'son P£ Vic*'ae C ..nch P£ Jam<*s P Va ar j p£ jprt^ O ^rtrsen PE Ar''nrrn P Anderson P£ Vam P PoTs P£ Vark A Se-0 PE Ga»v \A' Mcr«^ PE CJane J fdger^on. P£ Oar>« A < ry.hennian P£ .Phiijp J Casw«!i PE Vark 0 '.Vaifis. ?E F\< ies ‘S ,e'-:^n P£ * L Pn-f;o G'?\n :it P£ Aarn L 'A P£ Ga-, 0 ^ P£ F *000 Fes:*' ^E kf't** P Shawn C G-.sta*son p£ Cer o C \ ^ P£ Chaf'es A £'<kson Lfo M p?.N* rkv Cscn James F E-geharor November 3, 1992 Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 i «. "A 1r - NOV 5 1G9P Re: #1778 Goetten Subdivision File 139-1778 Dear Mike: We have reviewed the proposed lot division on the Goetten property, located east of Orono Orchard Road on Fox Street. The existing 30 foot wide right-of-way along the north side of the property is inadequate. Also, because there are three or more homes which have access to Fox Street, the road should be improved with a cul-de-sac at this time. We recommend that the aforementioned property dedicate an additional 20 feet of roadway right-of-way, ending with a 50 foot radius circle for a cul-de-sac just west of Barrett Avenue. The proposed right-of-way is shown on the enclosed half section map. The roadway and cul-de-sac should be constructed with equal assessments to all abutting properties which access onto Fox Street, The estimated construction cost of the road is $30,000. The westerly lot in the subdivision may be able to access onto Orono Orchard Road. The recommended location is 100 feet north of the railroad right-of-way. This location is 300 feet south of the Fox Street intersection. Additional site inspection will be necessary to verify that the access would have adequate stopping site distance. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. SDG:lk Enclosure 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 V * wi< 21/•Jb ^8 fm yu J V * N # i1 1 ' ’ ^*• ll 1 * \ ^1 , ?- 1R« i 1 (*6)\z»i ftp. f» (15)’. ' R If < 1 1 * '* **1 R '• 1r?3)r'' R 1 (22)1 ^ * s > R '• 1 (21) II * f ; R IS (20)II ^i - R i<Ill'll ^I 1 1 • 1 ^‘d II '• * f 11 4 Ni* ^_________. .'r ■* KE“'i. c:>nai 9 lOI t 00 • • • • • • V (ID * • • •• •• • ^ • * •• Z' •ni t (M) f iCJE 3».«i JJ* OROtiO ~T7 \» • • • S (BPr EXHIBIT G ^ lU*) Basis for Right-of-Way Dedication Requirement This request for road dedication and improvement is consistent with Orono's Subdivision Code Section 11.40, Subd. 2 "Widening and Realignment of Existing Roads". That section reads as follows; "Where a subdivision borders an existing narrow road or when the Comprehensive Municipal Plan or some other agency indicates plans' for realignment or wide ling a road that would require use of some of the land in the subdivision, the subd^viier shall be required to improve and dedicate at his expense such areas for widening or realignment of such roads. Such frontage roads and streets shall be improved and dedicated by the subdivider at his own expense to the full width as required by this chapter." Section 11.33, Subd. 4 requires that for a residential public street, the typical section serving 3 to 10 residential units is a 28' minimum paved width, with a 50 ’ right-of-way. Section 11.33, Subd. 1 (B) indicates the right-of-way for a local street shall be 50', with 50' radius for cul-de-sacs. The City has continuously and consistently required the dedication and improvement of rights-of-way when subdivisions border substandard roads. A partial listing follows: Year Subdivision Name Action 1977 North Arm Estates, 4th Addition 1778 Farm at Long Lake 1981 Brenten Woods 1982 Navarro City required additional 17' x 250' right-of-way to bring North Arm Lane up to a 50' standard City required 33' additional right- of-way for 875' length of Dakota Ave/Long Lake Blvd City Required additional 5' of right-of-way for 375' length of Togo Road City required additional 20' of right-of-way for a 400' length of Blaine Avenue 1982 Halcyon Hallow 1983 Wood End Acres City required 5' additional right- of-way for 150' length of Togo Road City required dedication of portion of cul-de-sac at terminus of future Lyman Avenue 1986 Beau Marais City required additional 15' - 18' of right-of-way for a 380' length of Fox Street - h * ^u&DiU. § 11.33 D. Intersections shall be designed with a flat stopping area of at least thirty (30) feet in a residential area and sixty (60) feet in a commercial or industrial area. The stopping area shall- be designed to provide a maximum grade of two (2) percent. E. Where any street intersection will involve earth banks or existing vegetation inside any lot corner that would create a traffic hazard by limiting visibility, the subdivider shall cut such ground and/or vegetation (including trees) in coniectron with "the grading of the right-of-way to -h® deemed necessary by the City to provide an adequate sighr distance. F. The crown of all streets, including intersections, shall be three percent (3%) or less. Subd. 4. Typical Section. The typical section indicated herein is as determined for a Clay Subgrade (A-6 Soil Classifica­ tion) and may be subject to change. Soil borings may be require to be determined by the City. Private Street - Residential Units 3-6 R.O.W.* 50' Over 7 50' Dnhiir* street - Residential Units 3-10 R.O.W.* 50' Over 10 50' Maximum Maximum cul-de-sac length number of units on Public Street - Commercial 0 Units 1+ R.O.W.* 70' M.P.W.** 24' 28' Section " Class 5 100% crushed 2341 Bituminous Surface 8 3" 8” Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface M.P.W.** 28' 32' Section 8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface 8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface M.P.W.** 32' Section CX21SS 4 Class 5 100% crushed 2341 Bituminous surface 8" 8" 4*’ i; * Right-Of-Way Width ** Minimum Paved Width ORONO CC 462 (4-1-84) f § 11.40 SEC. 11.40. ROAD DEDICATION AND RESERVATIONS. Subd. 1. New Perimeter Streets. Street systems in new subdivisions shall-be laid out so as to eliminate or avoid new perimeter half-streets. Where an existing half-street is adjacent to a new subdivision, the other half of the street shall be improved and dedicated by the subdivider. The City may authorize a new perimeter street where the subdivider improves and dedicates the entire required street right-of-way width within his own subdivision boundaries. Subd. 2. Widening and Realignment of Existing Roads. Where a subdivision borders an existing narrow road or when the Comprehensive Municipal Plan or some other agency indicates plans for^realignment or widening a road that would require use of some of the land in the subdivision, the subdivider shall be required to improve and dedicate at his expense such areas for widening or realignment of such roads. Such frontage roads and streets shall be improved and dedicated by the subdivider at his own expense to the full width as required by this Chapter. Subd. 3. Land reserved for any road purposes may not be counted in satisfying yard or area requirements of the Zoning Chapter whether the land is to be dedicated to the City in fee simple or an easement is granted to the City. SEC. 11.41. DRAINAGE AND STORM bEWKRS. Subd. 1. General Requirements. The City shall not approve any subdivision which does not make adequate storm or flood water runoff. Surface water drainage patterns shall be shown for each and every lot and block. The drainage system shall be separate and independent of hX sewer system. Storm sewers, where required, the method as approved by the City, and a copy tions shall be submitted along with plans. provided so that surface water is not carried across or around any intersection, nor for a distance of more ^nan 600 feet in the gutter in urban areas. When calculations indicate capacities are exceeded at a point, A to made for flow beyond that point, and basins shall be used to intercept flow at that point. Subd. 2. Nature of Storm Water Facilities. A. Location. The subdivision shall be the City to carry away by pipe or open ditch any spring or surface water that may exist either previously to, or ^ subdivision. Such drainage facilities shall be , easements right-of-way where feasible, or in ® --^ance with of appropriate width, and shall be constructed in ac the City's construction standards and specifications. (4-1-84) ORONO CC 464 C6/mMMAj»ry AiAfjAGr^m*?*^ PMaJ - s^xcei^er^ I 1 TRANSPORTATION JUNE, 1980 I i URBAN TRANSPORTATION POLICIES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. LOCAL STREETS IN THE URBAN AREA WILL BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE CITY. Because the land use and street use density of the urban neighborhoods is relatively high, the City will provide public street access to all urban properties. City responsibility for proper maintenance levels will ensure passable, all-weather streets available at all times for emergency vehicles and for general public ingress and egress. i ALL URBAN PROPERTIES SHOULD BE DIRECTLY SERVED BY THE PUBLIC STREET SYSTEM. Urban density development is not appropriate on narrow or poorly maintained private roads. Significant exceptions to this rule are in the case of a planned residential or commercial development having private maintenance personnel, or on sensitive lakeshore lots where two homes could be served by one common private driveway to reduce hardcover and topographical problems. URBAN STREETS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO URBAN DESIGN STANDARDS. All urban streets will be paved and of sufficient width to accommodate the number of properties being served. Intersections and driveway aprons will be designed and regulated according to commonly accepted engineering safety standards. Street drainage will be designed to utilize existing natural drainage systems and to avoid direct runoff into the Lake. CURB CUTS AND DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS WILL BE LIMITED FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY. All new curb cuts and driveway locations will be subject to performance standards relating to sight distance, lot width and proximity to intersections or other driveways. All properties will be allowed access, but the number of access points and the location of allowable access will be limited for public traffic safety purposes. 1 1 ON STREET PARKING WILL BE STRICTLY LIMITED. No parking will be permitted on narrow streets or at hazardous locations. All urban development must provide adequate on-site parking facilities. I I I CMP 7-10 I I 1 4l I M U I TRANSPORTATION JUNE, 1980 6. THE CITY WILL PURSUE*ADDITIONAL PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE-HIKE TRAIL FACILITIES. The completion of an interconnected bike-hike trail system is important to the further­ ance of alternative transportation incentives. The City will encourage Hennepin County to speedily implement the planned bike-hike trail system along several county roads. The separation of bicycle and pedestrian traffic from vehicular traffic is of the utmost importance in accident prevention. 7. THE CITY WILL PROMOTE IMPROVED MASS TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS. Orono has established a Park and Ride Transit System. Orono encourages improved bus scheduling and improved service, especially at off-peak hours. Orono strongly supports the "Tonkamobile" program and encourages expansion to provide improved Excelsior-Wayzata service via Orono's North Shore neighborhoods. RURAL TRANSPORTATION POLICIES 1. 2. 3. PUBLIC STREETS IN THE RURAL AREA WILL BE PRIMARILY LIMITED TO THE EXISTING COLLECTOR AND ARTERIAL GRID SYSTEM, The low rural land use density does not require nor can it economically stipport an extensive public street system. Rural lot arrangements have always been served by the existing grid streets and are capable of subdivision to the planned rural density without requiring additional public street investments. THE RING ROUTE CONCEPT UTILIZES AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE THE EXISTING RURAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM. The principal corridor for traffic from Minnetrista and points west utilizes Hennepin County Roads No. 6 and 19 and State Highway 12. The City of Orono has constructed a key link between County Roads 6 and 19. Additional ring route traffic uses the existing north-south collector roads to travel away from the Lake toward these principal travel routes. THE CITY OF ORONO WILL ENCOURAGE ALL NECESSARY ROAD SURFACE AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED TO ACCOMMODATE AND TO FACILITATE THROUGH TRAFFIC ON THE RING ROUTE. This will include cooperation with the City of Long Lake in accommcdating traffic on Highway 12. CMP 7-11 transportation JUNE, 1980 4. 5. 6. RURAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS WILL UTILIZE PRIVATE ROAD FEEDERS TO SUPPLEMENT THE EXISTING PUBLIC ROAD GRID. Because of topographical 3icitations, the historic shane of rural land divisions, and the low density of rural land use, most new rural residential lots are best preserved by short dead-end roads running off the existing street system. The low number of dwellings on each road, the dead-end configuration and the scattered road locations make public roadway maintenance excessively costly compareu to any public benefit. Therefore, most new rural lots will be directly served by privately owned and maintained roadways. New public streets will be accepted where a "through" configuration provides a general public benefit and/or where the number of residences justifies public maintenance expense. PRIVATE RURAL ROADWAYS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO RURAL DESIGN STANDARDS. The City will regulate private road design standards to ensure environmental protection and adequate all- weather access to all properties. The type and width of road surface required will vary with the number of residences to be served and hence the amount of expected vehicle usage. The length of dead-end roads will be limited for public safety purposes. THE CITY WILL GUARANTEE REASONABLE MAINTENANCE LEVELS AND PUBLIC ACCESS ON ALL PRIVATE ROADS. In the process of approving rural subdivisions, the City will acquire underlying public ingress, egress, and access easements over all private roads. These easements will ensure legal access of the public to all properties served by the private road. Development contracts backed by acceptable forms of financial responsibility will assure that all private roads are designed and constructed according to City- approved standards and specifications. The City will further guarantee that all private roads are maintained to reasonable standards at all times through required maintenance agreements and/or i-'omeowner' s associations, and that failv .e of the f.-rivate group to so maintain their private road will be cause for the City to accomplish needed maintenance and to assess the benefitted properties for the direct cost of such maintenance. i i I i I I I I I I I I I I I I '1 I I CMP 7-12 I liI 1 I I 1 a 1 i 1 ] ] 1 ] 1 1 1 1 TRANSPORTATION JUNE, 1980 7. 8. 9. DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS AND RURAL STREET OR PRIVATE ROAD INTERSECTIONS WILL BE LIMITED FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY. Rural traffic sp6ed is generally faster than that in urban neighborhoods requiring greater sight distances and a lesser number of intersection conflicts for the same degree of traffic safety. Joint use of carefully located private roads will generally be preferred over direct access onto public highways from separate properties. RURAL TRAILS ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE TOTAL ALTERNATE TRANSFORATION SYSTEM. Rural trails offer access to the Hennepin County Park Reserve Lands from all areas of the City. Rural trails offer horseback riding as well as walking and bicycle opportunities- The City will encourage completion of the planned bike-hike trail system and the private development of rural trails connecting the public trail system with individual rural properties. The City will continue to restrict motorized use of trails within Orono as inappropriate to the trail's basic purpose and as incompatible with adjacent residential properties. THE CITY WILL NOT PROMOTE MASS TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR RURAL ORONO. The planned rural land use density cannot economically support public transit services. Existing bus routes pass through the rural area enroute between Long Lake, Wayzata and urban Orono. These routes are sufficient to serve Orono*s rural needs and will in fact provide additional rural service as the need for additional urban service increases. No new route locations are necessary as rural residents desiring to use transit services will use the established park and ride locations in Navarre and Wayzata. CMP 7-13 J transportation JUNE, 1980 THP TRANSPORTATION PLAN Orono's location on the perimeter of the Metropolitan Urban has pretty well dictated that our Transportation Plan will a plan for streets and roads. Orono has no planning needs and commercial centers, and for efficient commuter movement congested, environmentally sensitive lakeshore. Service Area be essentially for airports, principal need neighborhoods away from the The principle components of Orono's Transportation Plan are as follows: 1. DEVELOPING THE RING ROUTE CONCEPT including designation and minor arterials to direct traffic away from Lake Minnetonka. 2. shoreline and other scenically attractive routes. 3.DEVELOPING THE PRIVATE ROAD CONCEPT for access to low density rural residential properties. 4.PROMOTING REASONABLE LEVELS OF PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICE FOR ORONO'S URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS including maintenance of whe existing MTC ous routes and investigation of alternative public transit modes for commuter travel to the center of the Twin Cities region. nPONO^S RQADV/AY CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Of Transportation as applied to the types of roadways serving Orono. MAP NO. 14 INDICATES THE CLASSIFICATION PLAN FOR STREETS AND ROADS IN ORONO. This plan is consistent with the regional transportation p and facilities of the Met...-‘rcl i tan Council, the Minnesota Department of and with Orono's urban and rural land use plans. .The provide detailed explanations of each of Orono's roadway classifications. CMP 7-14 ( I I I I I 1 I I I I I I f I 1 f3 i i 1 1 la fl' I a M i 01 i « TRANSPORTATION JITWE, 1980 PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL « Principal Arterial is a capacity, controlled access highway designed to move ^3^ area, not within a community. Principal arterrals have access. The only principal arterial near Orono xs that portxon of State SJghwa; 12 that becomes limited-access east of Orono-s eastern boundary with Wayzata. INTERMEDIATE ARTERIAI. An Intermediate Arterial is ® M moderatel'y high capiT^ity highway designed to move vehicles between cities and in Orono*s situation, between the free-standing growth centers and out-state cities west of Orono into the metropolitan ^^ea. are limited and controlled. Land use access is intended 1-7-affic aenerators without direct access to residential properties. state Highway 12 is an Intermediate Arterial through access and intersection characteristics are typical of a minor or collector. JURISDICTION: STATE DEPART?1ENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: MINIMUM 100 FEET FOR TWO LANE HIGHWAY MINOR ARTERIAL A Minor Arterial is a controlled access, moderate capacit. street of^lfEway designed to move vehicles within planning subregions and ^^“en Idjalent'subregions. The Lahe Minnetonha arterial functioning to move, principally commuters and truck ' from the western Lake Minnetonka communities into the tS^Twin Cities. The minor arterial route channe s “ = Lahe Minnetonka to State Highways 12 and 55, and i" access a direct intersection with Interstate 494 in Plymouth. ®^ is intended to be limited to major traffic generators and local intersections without direct access to individual residences. JURISDICTION: HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: MINIMUM 80 FEET FOR TWO LANE HIGHWAY COLLECTOR A Collector street functions to collect traffic from local COLLECT.QB A C hborhood activity centers or to rntersectrons “tr»Lor or intermediate arterials. Local land use access rs permrtted but is regulated as to location and number with direct access to be avoided whenever alternative local street access is available. Intersectio with other collectors are often controlled with signals or with four-way stop signs. Traffic usage is moderate. JURISDICTION: COUNTY OR CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: 60-66 FEET •Tl CMP 7-15 TRANSPORTATION JUNE, 1980 SCENIC PARKWAY Scenic parkway is a designation and classification used by the Cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul and applied by Orono to those roads which traverse especially scenic and environmentally significant areas of the City. The scenic parkway is typically a narrow, curvy, slow speed road which provides access to recreational areas and special vistas of scenic attractions. High volume through traffic a»id commercial traffic is not appropriate on scenic parkways because these users do not benefit from the attraction and because the physical nature of the roadway is not conducive to efficient through traffic movement. Because of environmental sensitivity, scenic parkways cannot be rebuilt into higher capacity collectors or minor arterials without adversely affecting the natural setting, the scenic quality of the road and/or the property rights of abutting landowners. Because of the natural topography of the area, scenic parkways also provide some of the traffic and local access functions of both local and collector streets. JURISDICTION: COUNTY OR CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: 50-66 FEET LOCAL STREETS Local streets are public streets that function to provide direct access to abutting properties. Local streets carry traffic within neighborhoods rather than through traffic between neighborhoods. Inter­ sections with collector streets are controlled by stopping the local street traffic. JURISDICTION: CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: 50-60 FEET DEAD-END: LENGTH WILL BE LIMITED BY PUBLIC SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS PRIVATE ROAD A private road is a privately owned and privately maintained road, located in the rural area or within a planned development, that functions as a local access street. The City will require that private roads be constructed and maintained to City standards. The City will acquire an easement for public ingress, egress and access to all properties, but the City will allow the property owners to limit normal use of the road to the benefitting landowners and their invitees. Private roads will be located on platted outlets intended for joint and several ownership by all the benefitted property owners. JURISDICTION: HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATICti WITH UNDERLYING EASEMENT TO CITY MAXIMUM SERVICE: APPROXIMATELY TEN RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: 30-50 FEET DEPENDING UPON NUMBER OF USERS DEAD-END: LENGTH WILL BE LIMITED BY PUBLIC SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS CMP 7-16 i a 0 a a a a transportation JUNE, 1980 ill a a m a PRIVATE DRIVEWAY A driveway is a privately owned and privately maintain !!S^!SS!!To^:^:sr'p:::i abutting street. Private j:cc^LrpnvatrersLents where dr“::aJs”Lc:r:n !rter;enL%"ri:^?rto't between^be residence served and the street. JURISDICTION: PROPERTY OWNER MAXIMUM SERVICE- 1 RESIDENCE TYPICAL; JOINT DRIVEWAYS ALLOWED WITH MAXIMUM SER . RESIDENTS PER DRIVEWAY IN RURAL AREAS MORE USERS REQUIRE PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS DRIVEWAY WIDTH- WILL BE REGULATED WHERE MORE THAN ONE USER IS INVOLV DRIVEWAY WIDTH. PURPOSES WHERE THERE IS EXCESSI LENGTH BETWEEN THE RESIDENCE AND THE PUBLIC ROAD EXISTING ROADWAY MAINTENANCE JURISDICTIONS ARE REASONABLE AS THEY^IATE TO THE CLASSIFICATION PLAN. The State of Minnesota has appropria jurisdiction over the only Intermediate Arterial in the City. The Hennepin County Department of Transportation the only Minor Arterial designated in the plan. citv- Hennepin County will assume jurisdiction in the future tj« City built*^ring route link between County Road 19 and County Road . Hennepin County has jurisdiction over most of the j==j9nated Scenic Lake Minnetonka and ?o County maintained landings for residents who do not reside in Orono. The City those scenic Parkways that are away from the immediate lakeshor including the access road to the Orono Golf Course. The City has appropriate jurisdiction of most of the of the local streets which serve all Orono residen . ♦.y.„r-tlon segments have been designated for Municipal State Ai cons assistance, including: OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD from County Road 6 to Fox Street, County Road 8 WILLOW DRIVE from County Road 6 to State Highway 12 and from the Long Lake border to Fox Street FOX STREET from Willow Drive to County Road 146 McCulley Roa (Ring Route link) between County Road 6 and County Road Finally, individual property owners have appropriate over those Private Roads serving only their individual prop CMP 7-17 £x^<s/r /f L To: From: Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager November 6, 1992 Subject: Subdivision #1779, Andrew Goetten - Septic Review Soil testing and system design has been submitted for a five bedroom home including primary and alternate drainfield sites for Lot 2 of this subdivision. Lot 1 is currently connected to City sewer. The soil testing and septic system design meet all Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and City of Orono standards based on the existing property lines. The depth of seasonal saturation (mottling) is between 18" and 24* requiring the installation of a mound system. Slope at both sites is 6%. Topographic location and site drainage is adequate. Also, all setbacks meet City code. The Zoning staff has indicated that a 20* road dedication along Fox Street may be required as a condition of the subdivision. If the 20* easement is required, the alternate drainfield site will have less than a 1’ separation from the new property line. Steve Schirmers has indicated that another alternate site is possible if a variance can be granted for the slopes up to 8%. Soil testing has not been completed for this alternate drainfield site. Staff can only approve the soil testing and septic system design if the 20' dedication for Fox Street is not required. If the 20' dedication is required, additional soil testing must be provided for a new alternate drainfield site. Isv \ I ^ - A^OR. € (po ^ rr^/^ HARDCOVER CALCUUTION WORKSHEET (f^oposfa lOT 2)1 SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' (3qO-100^ Existing Hardcover in Zone • • a . H ouse .S2.X 2C.3 S3 ' 353 S.F LENGTH 2. O X WIDTH <r. o S • /z S.F X 2,5 /7 S.F •• X S S.F f 8,0 X 32, y 259 S.F( B.Garage _ 2it S. 3 20. y X X S. 2 /Z,3 S3 3Y ZSi S.Fi C.Driveway Z Y X 3» €S 8€S.F. X • • • • • S.F. 0.Si DEWALK X /9S S.F. Cu4US X 7S S.F. X SS S.F.E. ■ Jatio/ X » .ZYO vs V S.F. F.Landscape . - X ?ZO S.F. AREAS underlain BY ,s n sfo . S.F. PLASTIC SHEETING X • • ••S.F. /C Y X • • /2, y S3 Z 03 S.F. CfiAtc. stfr G. Other /. y y X 3 J S.F. 892. Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone 2S5*^S.F. 2ss “y ■=. B X 100 (zsVo i\ iimh. rtM I V i b V 1J ?2 s 1 C Q O Q (Ps ? S C 1 JJ ^ O O ^ o ^ P ■§‘^1 i^^rIII«K » I ■ >0^ Y # cIf 4 TcC# J^r ' -4.it->\ >V >V 1 ,1 S *"*8 f * ■» t ■ i's n T^ / / A 4*’ \V'-' ^ ^ 3 V.4 hi jfn \\ X J ••Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator Prom: Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator November 9, 1992 Subject: #1778 Andrew Goetten, 1385 Fox Street Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB, Single family rural residential, 2 acre minimum lot size Application: Request for lot area variance in conjunction with subdivision Application #1779 List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B ~ Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit R- Exhibit (^~ Application Applicant's Memo of Request MUSA Boundary Map Zoning Map Resolution No 1178 (8/11/80) Additional Pertinent Documentation from 1979-1981 Staff Analysis for Potential Rezoning to LR-IB In 1980 the Minnetonka Bluffs area was provided with municipal sanitary sewers. Part of that project included construction of lift station at the easterly end of the Goetten property at 1385 Fox Street. The property owners granted said easement to the City at no charge. Related to the easement was a request by the property owners for a single sewer unit to serve their existing residence located generally in tVe east half of the property, and a request for the future ability to subdivide the property leaving 1 acre with the house and a 2 acre rural unsewered lot to the west. The City adopted Resolution No. 1178 entitled "Determining that One Sanitary Sewer Service Will Be Provided For The Property Located At 1385 Fox Street, And Determining Standards For Any Future Subdivision Of The Property". Further, on November 23, 1981 the City adopted Resolution No. 1337 to define the Metropolitan Urban Service Area Boundary for the Bluffs project area. The boundary was placed 330' east of the center line of Orono Orchard Road, clearly defining a portion of the Goetten property inside the MUSA boundary and leaving a larger portion outside. The questions for the Planning Commission to first whether these past City actions obligate the a lot area variance for the proposed Goetten (Application #1779), and secondly, whether circumstances and stated hardships are sufficient to grant a variance. consider are City to grant subdivision the unique justification rii»^ M. •] O 9 1 I*!* •iticx«i •lf¥cx«| LfK^il f L Zoning File #1778 November 9, 1992 Page 3 Discussion Staff advised applicant's agents that the proposed subdivision and variance would best be initially addressed as a sJcetch plan. Further, it was staff's recommendation that applicant and City proceed with a request to rezone the entire Bluffs neighborhood so that the lot area variance question could be avoided. Applicant chose to make a preliminary plat application and variance request without benefit of a sketch plan review. Adding complexity to the request is the City Engineer's recommendation for dedication of additional right-of-way, which would leave less than 3 acres in the main body of the property. Potentially, this results in one or both new lots being less than a 1 acre or 2 acre standard. Please review the documentation of discussions, letters, etc. surrounding Resolution No. 1178. Although I was involved in drafting that resolution. City Planner Alan Olson and City Manager Dick Benson were main parties involved in the discussions, and their letters and memos may shed some light on the City's intent. Painfully lacking in any of the documentation is discussion of either the terms "variance" or "rezoning". In staff's opinion. Resolution No. 1178 and the subsequent MUSA alignment leave absolutely up in the air the question as to which direction such a subdivision would proceed in the future. Staff believes that the City actions of 1980 and 1981 anticipated a rezoning of the newly sewered Bluffs area to 1 acre standards, which has never occurred. Only cne subdivision occurring after adoption of the 1975 zoning coae has been found in which the creation of substandc^rd lots within a new subdivision was allowed. That case is the 1979 conversion of the Stubbs Bay Marina property, which had previously been zoned B-2, to three residential units zoned LR- lA, with variances to allow 3 half-acre lots and a half-acre outlet in a 2-acre zone. This was basically a contract downzoning, and variances were necessary to protect the investment of the property owner and avoid the issue of a "taking" as a result of the rezoning. The Stubbs Bay Marina situation clearly is a distinct and unique case within the LR-IA 2 acre zoning district. There are no other properties with the identical situation as Goetten's, i.e. in a 2 acre zone, split by the MUSA boundary, and having a resolution on file that sets up a future 1 acre sewered/2 acre unsewered lot split. However, it might be interpreted that the effect of granting this variance is to set a Zoning File #1778 November 9, 1992 Page 4 precedent allowing any large (2+ acre) sewered lot within the MUSA boundary and in a 2 acre zone, to be subdivided into 1 acre lots. There are a significant number of such lots, mainly in the Stubbs Bay and West Ferndale project areas, a few in Crystal Bay, and a few others scattered about. It has been a longstanding City policy that to existing dense rural development is merely to problems, not to allow for the creation of development. The Community Management Plan (Page part that sewering existing residences is one solving a documented health problem, but "in no sewerage foster new development; it would only be existing deficiencies..." bringing sewers solve existing higher density 6-44) states in alternative to case would such used to correct Rezoning Potential A review of the Minneton)ca Bluffs Sewer Project Area suggests that no increases in development density are likely to result from a rezoning to 1 acre standards. Only 2 of 25 sewered lots currently exceed 1 acre in area, those being 1.05 and 1.02 acres respectively. Further, there are no existing vacant parcels which could be built on without the need for at least a 50% variance, which the City would not necessarily have to grant. Although one might argue that with 5 building sites currently consisting of 2 or more uncombined parcels there is potential for those parcels to be sold and variances requested, that potential already exists under the current zoning, and a rezoning to 1 acre does not change the parameters for granting area and width variances for buildabi]ity. The most compelling reason to rezone fllB would be to allow property owners more freedom and flexibility in improving their properties. By having a set of zoning standards that more closely fits the existing character of the area, variances will be reduced. Analysis of Variance Request In analyzing whether or not to grant a variance. Planning Commission should consider the following questions: 1.Does the wording of Resolution No. 1178 and the City's subsequent placement of the MUSA boundary constitute an obligation and Intent to grant a future variance, or does it anticipate a rezoning of the sewered Minnetonka Bluffs properties to a 1 acre standard? 1 Zoning File #1778 November 9, 1992 Page 5 2. Are the hardships and unique circumstances stated in applicant's letter of request sufficient to justify a recommendation to grant a lot area variance associated with a subdivision, in light of the strong directive of Section 11.10, Subd. 14? 3. Has the City granted such a variance in the past? Are there other similarly situated properties which could make the same request? Would granting this variance set a negative precedent? Staff RecGBaiendation The subdivision code. Section 11.10, Subd. 14 states very clearly and succinctly that a variance shall not be approved to increase the density above the minimum lot area requirements. On this basis alone, staff would have to recommend denial of the requested variance. In light of the 1980 resolution and 1981 MUSA boundary placement, it is clear that applicant was relying in good faith that the City would provide a means by which his subdivision could legally occur. Staff believes that a rezcning of the Minnetonka Bluffs area is the most logical and appropriate way for this to occur. Such a rezoning and other possible rezonings of previously sewered rural neighborhoods should occur within the context and guidelines set forth in the Community Management Plan regarding development and sewering of the rural area. Isv 10/22/92 10:42 THE CITY OF ORONO 612-473-7 • Y CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCK APPLICATION rjry r,c nj-niJQ FliiA'fiCE OFFICE Initial Application Fee $17>.00 '($S0.00 per each additional variance) Qi rru iJ5.i Renewal Variance Pee $10C.00 . / / (DO Chang* *rom original V JL %-sSv ? _ Variance for non conforming u»e $200.00 f After-the-Pact Fees (Double g ^ PROPSRTY INFORMATION ___ 1385 Fox Street. Orono. Minnesota 55391Site AddreBS— . . . . . . . . % 02-117-23 340001Property Iddntife Hunbdr (PelePe) ■ « Attach legal description to application included on reqttired survey. (• ee Date Property A««iur?ed_Way_J984- - - I *«0Wdo not) also own the edjacMt P*”*^* ® nthtrrf-i-Preaent use of property t _- - - - - - - - - - - - -pother (sped y;- - - - - -- Soning pi^^»‘ict» RR-lB — ___ _ __....._ Imream Phone (home). ^73-66^-------------APFLZCAHT Andrew J. Coetten________________ Phone (work) n /fl —------------ s^><rAssi 1385 Fox Street____________Cityt Orffpo_______^ ONHBR Uf different than applicant) Phone (home)——- „ _____ Phone (work)_______________—Name _____________ ■ Addr....__________ _ city._ —!f!Ir:r:r=:rr„ DBSCBIPnOH or BBQOIST Con.truction Coat: ------------------------- Oeacribe request in detail i See Exhibit A VARXABGBS XBQOXRBD BArdcOVUr lidt CoVBITBfJd__X Lot Area Lot Width ----- Harocove*^ ----- »4A. Rear Average Lakahhore___^Setbacks ___ Front ___ side ----- Rear -----e 9 _ _Other f anecifV) -- - - -- - - - - - - - - NARDSBXP/DBSCRIPTZCni OF UN06UAL PROFNRTT COMDXTKMiS Describe undue hardship or practl<^l ^ conditions preventing compliance with Zoning ^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ See Exhibit A -- " 1 L 10/22^10:42 THE CITY CF ORONO 612-473-7357 007 i - (at^'tach ttddit^xonal sheets if nscess«*‘y) RBQUIRBD SOBMITTALS ______w-4 4.4..^ >.V the eppliestlen All of the follnwinq InforMtloo b.' by . r=^:ZZ: d€adlla€ date in order for yoor »policatiop^» ^,.gSS£l---------EfflE— 1. X Completed Applicatiw Form «««*»» within 150' (you must obtain 2. X certified Property Ovmers List of t wlLnee A-603 Govt Center this list from Hennepin county Department of Plnanc 348-3271). 3. X Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). , include 4. tn Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed sur y con^hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy *i 5. ^Sm^^tJ’pMc^iirvey (existing and proposed ^***"^‘* in existing grade are proposed (provide one c^y H 8%"xll"). 8. ^ SIcetches or plana of floor t elevation seoarate^list of 7.*^A8 an addendum to this application, please attach a sep any other persons you wish notified of this appliesti a.___^Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign / remember that voor variance application is apt InfTrnistivn he* been ^nginJed. 1 If the abo^ to pro.lo. .11 requested by the Zoning and/or consultant expenses «viU o? iwlicrtifr.na r .uppll«J 1. true «d corr/^ DateApplicant's Signature sr:.?,“ssv •»»>“«• s:,“r.r r„'xr." tion and verification f^tJ t ^est. ^ Applicant must have Pi unable to at^.end a scheduled ^ j ^vise the Building « Zoning authorized agent attend in your place and Office of this change prior to the meeting. owner's Signature Exhibit A f ^ • V xJ VARIANCE APPLICATION OF ANDREW J. GOETTEN Summary description of request The site address of the property owned by Mr. Goetten ("Property") is 1385 Fox Street, Orono, Minnesota. The site is shown on Schedule 1 attached. The Property is legally described as: That part of Lot 3, Section 2, Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest comer of Lot 3 aforesaid and running thence East 720 feet to the Northerly line on side of right of way of the Minnetonka Branch of the Great Northern Railway; thence Southwesterly along the Northerly line on side of said right of way 827.05 feet to the West line of Lot 3 aforesaid; thence North 423.1 feet to place of beginning, the boundaries of which tract of land have been marked by three judicial landmarks placed at the most Easterly comer of said tract of land at a point in the Southwesterly line and at a point in the North line where said lines are intersected respectively by a line parallel to and 33 feet east of the West line of said lot. Also that part of the West 33 feet of Lot 3, Section 2, nship 117 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian lying Southerly of County Road No. 7, the boundaries of which tract of land have been marked by four judicial landmarks placed at the Northwest comer and the Northeast comer, respectively, of said tract of land, and at a point in the Westerly line thereof 288.3 feet South along said line from said Northwesterly comer, and in the East line thereof at a point 275.4 feet South of the Northeast comer thereof. The area of the Property is approximately 3.6 acres and is cxirrently zoned RR-IB. The portion of the Property upon which the existing residence is located (the "Residence Parcel") (approximately 1+ acre) is currently served by public sewe zi a result of the City’s Sewer Project 80-1 and lies within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area ("MUSA") line (See Schedule 2 attached). The remaining portion of the Property, approximately 2+ acres (the "Unsewered Parcel"), lies outside the MUSA line and is not connected to public 1 m •. / % ‘ •< t O', sewer, having been excluded from Sewer Project 80*1. Pursuant to Section 10.08 of the Orono Municipal Code (the "Code"), Mr. Croelten seeks a variance from the provisions of Section 10.28, subd. 5 of the Code which require a minimum lot area of 2 acres for property zoned RR-IB in order that the Council may approve his application to subdivide the Property into two lots corresponding to the Residence Parcel and the Unsewered Parcel. Mr. Goetten asks the Council to consider and grant his variance request because of the unique circumstances of the Property and because the granting of his request would not violate the spirit and intent of the Land Use Regulations for the City of Orono. Hardship/Description of unique property conditions A. Standard of review. The Council will hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning chapter in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of the circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Orono Mun. Code § 10.08, subd. 3. The Council will grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will not adversely affect the purpose and intent (the spirit) of the Zoning chapter and will not compromise the health or welfare of the public. Id. The Council will not adversely affect the spirit and intent of the Zoning chapter by granting the requested variance and allowing the subdivision of the Property into two lots corresponding to the Residence Parcel and the Unsewered Riuul Parcel. B. The strict enforcement of the 2 acre minimum lot area would cause Mr. Goette_n \mdue hardship because of the circumstances unique to the Property. There are several facts unique to the Property which cause a strict enforcement of the 2 acre minimum lot area to be an imdue hardship to Mr. Goetten. Most importantly, the Council has already considered and implicitly approved the subdivision of the J . -J •M .) Property in the context of Sewer Project SO-1. (See Resolution No. 1178) The City of Orono initiated Sewer Project 80-1 in part to solve existing on-site sewage treatment problems in the Minnetonka Bluffs area ("housing cluster 5 as shown on map 12 of the 1980 Community Management Plan). The Property is part of housing clustei 5, but is the only property therein which meets the RR-IB zoning requirements. All of the other lots in housing cluster 5 are substandard lots with respect to the lot area requirements of land zoned RR-IB. Granting the requested variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. Pursuant to Resolution No. 1178, the Council determined that one sewer service stub be provided to serve the Residence Parcel of the Property as part of Sewer Project 80- 1, as long as any future subdivision of the Property leave at least 1 acre for the existing residence, i.e. the Residence Parcei,. nd any new building site created, i.e. the Unsewered Parcel, will fully comply with all current zoning regxilations of RR-IB, including on-site sewage treatment. By so qualifying the sewer service extension, the Council de facto approved a subdivision subject to those guidelines contained in the resolution. Mr. Goetten relied on that de facto approval when he granted the City of Oronj an easement over the Unsewered Rural Parcel of the Goetten Property to place a lift station which was necessary for the sewering of the Minnetonka Bluffs area. It should be noted that Mr. Goetten did not insist on monetary consideration for granting this easement, not only because he wished to provide real support to the sewer project in this area, but also as a result of his reliance on the spirit and intent of Resolution No. 1178. In addition, the Council extended the MUSA boundary line to include the sewer-serviced portions of housing cluster 5, the effect of which wa** cut the Property into two lots corresponding to the Unsewered Parcel and the Residence Parcel. (See Resolution No. 1337) The de ’I JJrr n facto Council approval and the present location of the MUSA bou nda ry line are conditions unique to the Property. Granting the variance request would be consistent with these unique circumstances. As discussed in part C infra, the granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Code. A strict enforcement of the minimum lot area of 2 acres under the circumstances unique to the Property would cause Mr. Goetten Undue hardsxup. See Code Section 10.08, subd. 3(AX2, 3, 8, 11) (Goetten ’s circumstances meet definition in Code). The fact that the Residence Parcel of the Property is sewered and the Unsewered Parcel is not, the implicit approval of the proposeo subdivision and Mr. Goetten ’s reliance thereon, and the dividing effect of the current MUSA line are all circumstances unique to the Property. In light of those unique circumstances, the strict enforcement of the 2 acre minimum would be an undue hardship on the Mr. Goetten. C.Granting the proposed lot area variance will not in any wav adversely affect the spirit, purpose arid intent of the Zoning Chapter nor the health and welfare of the public. The guiding principles of the land use regulations of Orono are the avoidance of excessive, intensive land development and the threat to public health which occurs with excessive crowding of private sewage disposal systems on substandard building sites. (See Code § 10.01) The City recognizes that the creation of larger lot sizes in unsewered areas is mandatory and that on-site disposal systems must not be allowed on any site of less than two acres. Juxtaposed on t^e concerns over private sewage disposal systems is the "Urbanization Spiral" that results from the rapid extension of municipal sewer services into rural areas. The resulting "Development Paradox" is of paramount concern to the public and is a primary factor in the formulation of land use policy in Orono. .• • A. •»11 Vtt. •* The Council would not adversely affect the spirit, purpose and intent of the Code and the RR-IB classification by granting the Mr. Goetten’s request for a lot area variance, Granting the variance request would allow the Property to be subdivided (assuming approval of the conciurrent subdivision application) into two lots which would correspond approximately to the Residence Parcel and the Unsewered Parcel. The resulting lots would be a 1+ acre lot for the existing residence and a 2+ acre unsewered lot. The only new building site, then, resulting from the granting of the variance request would be the 2+ acre imsewered lot. The new building site would meet all of the ciurent zoning regulations of the zoning classification RR-IB, including all City on-site sewage treatment requirements. (Having stated thus, Mr. Goetten would support a proposal by the City to have the new building site connected to public sewer in the future.) Granting the variance request would not create any new, substandard building sites. The proposed subdivision which is based on the variance request also complies with t-bp qualifications set forth in Resolution No. 1178 when the Council first addressed the circumstances unique to the Property and arguably approved a future subdivision. In fact. Resolution No. 1178 is entitled "Resolution of the City County No. 1178 Determining That One Sanitary Sewer Service Will Be Provided For The Property Located At 1385 Fox Street, And Determining Standards for Any Future Subdivision of The Property." Resolution No. 1178 reads in pertinent part: 1. Any future subdivision of the property must leave not less than one acre for the existing residence. 2. Any new building site which might be created will comply with all current zoning regulations at the time of subdivision, the intent of this provision being that any new lot created in the future is not intended to be served by the 80-1 sewer project but is intended to fully comply with all City on-site sewage treatment requirements. 1 The residential lot and unsewered lot (the only new building site) which would result from a granting of the variance request fiilly comply with the lot size conditions previously imposed by the Council. The fact that no new substandard building lots would be created by the granting of the variance request is significant. In an interoffice memorandum to the then city administrator Walter R. Benson dated July 10, 1981, it was pointed out that the Council had indicated they would look favorably on a fut;ire subdivision of the Property into one 1+ acre sewered parcel and one 2-»- acre unsewered psurcel. (See Schedule 3 attached) The memorandum reasoned that the subdivision of the Goetten property into two lots, because of its 3.6 acre size, would not violate the land \ise policies against increased density because the only new building site would exceed the required lot area size for land zoned RR-IB. In essence, the Goetten Property was used to highlight those circumstances where a variance and subdivision of property should be allowed. In conclusion, granting the variance request would not adversely affect the purpose and intent of the zoning chapter or the health and welfare of the public. Moreover, the variance would allow Mr. Goetten to subdivide the Property in a manner consistent with Resolution No. 1178, on which he has relied for more than 10 years. Due to the unique circumstances surrounding the Property and the undue hardship that would result from the City’s failure to grant the variance, the Council should grant Mr. Goetten’s variance request. MLW:nnr:29299_l w • I . I o, OC.O I IWIM J 1/ —HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA t1(^ '^‘^/opar V 7>r>#4 ^0Tm ^0sr g 3^2 t 4rne%m00^g m0tm000 010*0 fU00)^ 9,»*T 0t A000 0*0 t0t*r0t ^0ir I *:. S I* . ^ • ‘ w * •»• - • ii :: v .. - ■4 I . i / i l; • * •'S' t .'-j •t $m^4 *f It^. M. |«H Ot« iw. »f ;/. o«i- >4>»t0ki0 ^ol. All**#* II. I*;; oi«** M*. J<«««rr $. |«f0 •«*•• Cr««a*«<* III, A(t***r ]•/• 0'«'-*>4t /I*. |«. !«/■ I « n .A.\ •'•*•••*• II*. ii’. ittO I LH’lC ^ OH#*M* l:« t »• 4* t*-v»l>.h<j^-),\.<^rrtw .%>/' s -> r V •' ■ ■'f •%*;i '■tf- TOs FROMt DATBt RB: Kik« OAffron S«ptle SystM* XBip«otor John R. 0«rhArdsoa( Public Vorics Coordlnctor •<* * V» I October 2» 1979 HtlcA. Bluffa Sanltaxy Sewer Project OB Septeaber 19th Mr. AnOrew Ooettea 1385 Pox Street endstated that he has a great concern about the routli^ of the sjml- tMTf ••Mr plv9 Is %ihst ths rinsl oulcoss wUX bs In r#|[SXM iloa In the Mtlcs. Bluffs area.to the prob. Mr. Goetten Is concerned about the buffer soae P*^PJ*^JouB^ Road 15 and if a pipe was Instead parallel yjtfcrthe railroad ^cks and his property, as per the very prellnlnaiy plan.and C( I told Mr. Ooetten that I would fowart this lnfor»tlMthat he should bring this up at a later data If la fact that project Is Inplenented. } r L MINNETONJIA BLUFFS QUESTIOUNAIPJE - SEVvER PROJECT The purpose of this questionnaire is to give you a chance to inform the Citv Council of your position on the proposed sanitary sewer to serve your area. Please return this questionnaire in the enclosed envelope within 7 days.- per unit.Based on the estimated assessment of 3, ^OQ ' and a total of / r units to be charged to your property, your total estimated assessment would be ^ 0, VOO ^ CHECK ONE (vO : I am in favor of a municipal sewer project to serve my residence. I am in favor of continuing with the use of a septic system for my residence and with strict enforcement of the City's on-site sewage treatment regulations. C0t4MENTS: Name ^ aj ^^oi=~n~*E7^PINS No. y.y Oo^L Site Address ) -Sfr-. FSTIMATED COST NOTICE The dollar amount listed above as your estimated p unlt^ssLsmeL iF-^sed upon a preliminary engineering analysis of expec Tsel cons^ructLn costs. ?he final per unit assessment may be higher or lower depending upon actual construction costs, easement acquisition o i? any? ^hrnllSbe? of units assessed and/or changes in project size or sc fJore. \ f\ <p/ue-M/o>7- Ass.e^s^ey^T p/ee-ct-wbes seot- COAJ/^GCrr lOAi s '.JILL. /GeQo-K.e’ /4 tA/k. I T-n=7U TO Yo'^ 2>er//€’(r‘ -t-v/mj oaj^ uajae'FFFc.’T. } I Ci Ia OtCKENiar^ 11 1 * _ .—l=J 1 1 "V..{z ' 3( r • */ 1 to 1 1 5 1 _ ‘’0-1 / U 1 1 1 -SHlU 1 ! ®- l{ ». _ If to 11 O0I^ % iM-ID M '■ --------------------------------» 1 t’- I:.e!-- Z* 30 LiJ,-e- 1 u n 1 n IjI , /t- IS*IP < N lJm IZ. 4 -0 .! (•» -Q-P •) Tl'U fS |3 n Vjs: uj uj V -0'^It _ 1 J 2 10 3 c B 1CQS J L ^ PINS No. C?Z-)fl'ZZ 3V Pool No. of units which would be . assigned to your property _l_ Red outline is area considered as your building site. Approx, area of your building site is 3>.UO acres. If you have questions regarding the extent or boundaries of your outlined' building site, please contact Mike Gaffron or Alan Olson at the City offices as soon as possible. 1 • • -.fQ*. S1MCCT 7 aP --------------- UlCxf riSON SiwtCI • 4 rni . •'S *» tf o ■Tv • " I . *1) II A'-' A OAo ' • •V I M / > 1 « 9 / HuAO . • • LAKL MINNETONKA (BROWNS bay ) -CZLl 7TT % • ^ JANAO LAKE r' . . : * V • • SEWER PROJECT ASSESSMENT DIVISION BOUNDARIES For assessment purposes, the proposed sewer project has been divided into four separate areas based on the variable construction techniques required for each separate service area. NOTE: Project division boundaries are'the same for Alternates I and II. LLC{h Q.. ALT. II S1I0\^4 rORCC ki.iN CHAviTr SCWCN CAlNOCll SefllC f4MH LOCATK>«« IIM ST410N To: From: Date: ! 1 \ iCour.c il Michael P. Gaffr'bn^' On-Site Systems Manager April 2I4., 1980 ,vT Subject: Mtka Bluffs - Orono Lane - W. Ferndale - Co. Rd. 15 Sewer Questionnaire Returns Below is an update on the questionnaire returns for the proposed sewer project. A. Minnetonka Bluffs 21 of 27, or 78/^, have returned the questionnaire. Of these 21 , 1i4- are in favor of sewer and 7 want to remain using on-site systems. Of the remaining 6, at least 1 is probably in favor and the rest are noncommittal. I recommend that we proceed by ordering the improvements and call for preparation of plans as soon as possible. The alternative course of action would be to proceed with hazardous building condemnations and attempt to repair, replace, or remove existing systems as necessary to ensure complianct: with State and local codes. B. County Rd. 15 - Marina Area I4. of 7 have returned the questionnaire; however, we have had contact with all but Dave Duff regarding their »*1 ews on.the ^ project. Mrs. Gregory, owner of the parcel south of the railroad tracks which was not assigned any units, called to indicate she would not return the questionnaire since she was not really involved in the project. The property owners in the immediate marina area have all indicated objection to the high cost of the project and wish to continue with on-site systems unless a less expensive project is proposed. Holding tanks would be the only acceptable method of on-site sewage disposal for these properties. I recommend that we continue our efforts in getting MWCC permission to pump directly into the force main. Based on our eventually obtaining this permission, we should then proceed with ordering the improvements and call for preparation of plans. C. Orono Lane 5 of 10 have returned the questionnaire, with 3 in favor of sewer Alternate II and 2 who want to continue using on-site systems. While the response here has been scanty, I must recommend that we proceed with a project since two-thirds of the Orono Lane area systems are non-conforming and in some case.^ are failing ml /- ibly. Making these systems conforming would be expensive ai,. on some lots not feasible. D. West Ferndale Of 17 properties which definitely would be assigned a sewer unit, 15 have returned questionnaires. Of these 15» 1- are in favor of sewer and 3 against. Of the 12 in favor, 7 want Alt.II (pressure), 3 want Alt. I (gravity), and 2 will go either way. In addition to the I7 definite units, 3 properties have extensive L. I Sewer Questionnaire Returns Page 2 wetlands which likely would cause the lots to be unbuildable unless variances were granted. Only one of the 3 ovmers has responded and was not in favor of sewer. I recommend that we proceed by ordering the improvements^ and call for preparation of plans. The responses seem to indicate that the lower first-cost pressure system is more desirable to the residents, and that they are generally in favor of going ahead with the project at this time. TO: Walter R. Benson, City Administrator FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, On-Site Systems Manager DATE: July 11, 1980 RE: Sewer Projects 80-1 and 80-2, Unit Assessment Determinations A number of properties within the boundaries of the proposed 80-1 and 80-2 projects require some decisions by Council and/or staff as to whether they will receive one or more sewer units or will be excluded entirely. Below I have listed briefly each specific situation with a description of what determinations must he made. 1. Thomas Carpenter - 480 Russell Avenue 1.80^ acre lot according to plat maps. Originally we determined a unit was optional. Owner has indicated he would like either two units or to be excluded from the project. He has adequate room for future drainfield. Giving him two units would allow for future division into two .90 acre ± parcels in a 2-acre zone. I recommend no units, with owner understanding he will never be able to connect to sewer. 2. Edward Hamm - 1230 Dickenson Street 0.97 acre lot. Owner has indicated he would like one unit to serve this property. Project plans at this point include stub to serve property. I recommend allowing 1 unit. 3. Edward Hamm - 480 Orono Orchard Road (Caretaker House) Owner indicated he would like this property to be excluded from project since it is combined with 15 acrei parcel to the north. I recommend excluding this property from the project. 4. ’Sears Imported Auto - Keene Avenue 0.52 acre lot: (3 combined lots) — no house on lot. Owner has requested one sewer unit to make this a buildable lot. I recommend this be referred to Planning Commission for review to determine buildability and/or whether stub should be allowed, based on restrictions set forth in the Orono Zoning Regulations 31.201 - 31.203, (lots of record not meeting zoning regulations). 5. Cedric Dettloff - 1255 Dickenson Street Qu^j-gntly has main house and small rental house on 0.31 acre lot. Owner indicates he would remove plumbing in rental unit and use as storage area, thereby requiring only one sew_r unit. I recomme.nd we go with one unit and require second building to have plumbing removed. July 11, 1?P0 Walter R. Benson Sewer Projects 80-1 & 80-2 Page 2 6. Leonard D. MacKinnon - 559 Russell Avenue Currently has main house and rental house on 0.43 acre lot. Owner has not indicated a preference for either one or two units, I recommend we assess two units to the property. Andrew Goetten - 1385 Fox Street 3.60 Acres. Owner has indicated he would opt for one unit to serve existing house, with any future division to be under 2-acre unsewered zoning regulations. I recommend this be allowed. 8. Douglas Skarp - West Ferndale Road 3 acre lot with 0.6 acrei dry. No house on lot. Owner has requested a sewer unit for the property. If sewf>r unit was allowe', buildable lot area would be governed under Oron^ Zoning Code 31.841 (wetlands credit). I recommend this be referred to Planning Commission for review. 9, Marinas - Windward Karine auid Minnetonka Boat Works Preliminary staff recommendation was one unit for marina buildings and one unit for pumpout, i.e. 2 units for Windward Marine, 2 units for Minnetonka Boat Works, and one unit each for the three resxdences adjacent, for a total of seven units. However, SAC charges for commercial properties are based on 274 gallons per day per SAC unit. I recommend staff investigate further to determine whether the proposed assessment distribution is equitable. 10. David Duff - 1420 Shoreline Drive 2.90 acre lot. Owner has riot indicated preference for inclusion or exclusion from the project. I recommend that the Duff property be excluded from the project. 11. William or Stanley Gregory - 1410 Shoreline Drive 9 Acres -• This property will not be included in the project. 'I r'EGULAR meeting of the ORONO council, JULY 14, 1980 Glenn Cook, City Engineer, reviewed his letter of July 11, 1980 concerning Recreation Open Space Development Guide Policy Plan with the City Council. Letter - Page 11 Page 10 OPEN SPACE POLICY PLAN Glenn Cook, City Engineer, reviewed the twenty- four hour traffic • unts on McCulley Roau, as of July 7, 1980, as follows: 6-19 6-26 6- 30 7- 1 7-2 6-20 6- 27 7- 1 7-2 7-3 2088 2117 2204 2383 2152 TRAFFIC COUNTS McCulley Road - r' P/-VMENT #6 Buffalo Bituminous McCulley Road Glenn Cook, City Engineer, informed the City COI4PLETION Council that McCulley Road is complete except COI4PLETION for minor cleanup. Buffalo bituminous expects to have all work done by July 17, 1980. The City is retaining $27,443.90 until all work is complete and $42,600 in liquidated damages. Glenn Cook, City Engineer, reviewed his letter cun'^erning payment #6 for the McCulley Roa , dated June 30, 1980, which states: "The construction on McCulley Road as been satisiactorily completed except for minor cleanup. estimate will be the final contract on t)ie project with liquidated damages being the only majo:' item remaining to be settled. "Payment request No. 6 reduced the retainage withheld on^the project from ten percent to five percent as all major construction items were completed at the time the estimate was processed. "The City's final position on liquidatea damages should be resolved at an early time to allow final payment to the contractor on the projec End of letter Michael Gaffron, On-Site Systems Manager, reviewed with the City Council the following memo, datea July 11, 1980: A number of properties within the boundaries • proposed 80-1 and 80-2 receive 80-1 & 80-2 PROJECTS , Paqf> 1 1REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORC .0 COUNCIL, JULY 14, 1980 Page 13 7. Andrew Goetten - 1385 Fox SLreet 'A 12. 3.60 acres. Owner has indicated he would opt for one unit to serve existing house, with any future division to be under two-acre unsewered zoning regulations. I recommend this be allowed. 80-1 & 80-2 SEWERS (Continued) 8. Douglas Skarp - West Ferndale Road Three acre lot with 0.6 acre- dry. No house on lot. Owner has requested a sewer unit for the property. If sewer unit were allowed, buildable lot area would be governed under Orono Zoning Code 31.841 (wet]inds credit). I recommend this be referred to the Planning Commission' for review. 9. Marinas - Windward Marine & Minnetonka Boat Works Preliminary staff recommendation was one unit for marina buildings and one unit for pumpout, i.e. two units for Windward Marine, two units for Minnetonka Boat Works, and one unit each for the three residences adjacent, for a total cJ seven units. However, SAC charges for commercial properties are based on 274 gallons per day per SAC unit. I recommend staff investigate further to determine whether the proposed assessment distribution is eguitab"• 10. David Duff - 1420 Shoreline Drive 2.90 acre lot. Owner has not indicated preference for inclusion or exclusion from the project. I recommend that the Duff property be excluded from the project. 11. William or Stanley Gregory - 1410 Shoreline Drive Nine acres -. This property will not be included in the project. Nature Conservancy holds title de-'‘d to this tri­ angular parcel southeast of in^-' 'section of County Road 15 and West Ferndc.le Road. This parcel has one- acre of dry bui]<Jable land, but has title restrictions which proatpit c. velopment of the property. I recommend that :!ie City Attorney review these restrictions and that lo units be assessed. 13. Marie H. Hamm - Orono Lane 1.1 acre lot appears nearly all dry buildable. While not located in a choice location, this lot would probably be buildable if sewer were available. The owner has not indicated a pireference to be included or excluded from the project. I recommend that this be referred to the Planning Commission for review. (Continued) I ^REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, JULY 14, 1980 14. George Rector — 2655 North Shore Drive Lot contains a small studio/guest cottage with plumbing that has not been rented previously, and owner indicated it will not be rented. I recommend that a single unit be assessed with the stipulation that the cottage may not be rented out. Council Meeting - July 14, 1980 Mayor Van Nest requested the City Council to act on each specific situation separately as a resolution for each to be executed by the individual property owner and reaffirm at our July 28, 1980 Council meeting. Butler moved, Hurr seconded, to draft a resolution to exclude the Thomas Carpenter property, 480 Russell Avenue, from the proposed sewer project. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). Page 14 80-1 & 80-2 SEWERS (Continued) THOMAS CARPENTER 480 Russell Avenue Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to draft a resolution that only one unit be assessed for the Edward Hamm property, 1230 Dickenson Street. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). EDWARD HAMM 1230 Dickenson Street Hurr moved, Butler seconded, to draft a resolution to exclude from the proposed sewer project the property of Edward Hamm, 480 Orono Orchard Road. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). EDWARD HAMM 480 Orono Orchard Roa Mayor Van Nest moved, Butler seconded, to draft a resolution stating that the owner. Sears Imported Auto, Keene Avenue, combine his th.<ee lots to allow one unit. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). SEARS IMPORTED AUTO Keene Avenue Mayor Van Nest moved, Hurr seconded, to draft a resolution stating that the owner, Cedric Dettloff, 1255 Dickenson Street, remove the plumbing from his rental unit, which will be used as a storage building. One unit to be assessed for main house. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). CEDRIC DETTLOFF 1255 Dickenson Street V y Mayor Van Nest moved, Butler seconded, to draft a resolution that if the owner's preference is one' assessed unit, then rental unit is to be discontinued and plumbing removed. One unit to be assessed for main house, Leonard D. MacKinnon, 559 Russell Avenue.' Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays. (0). LEONARD D. MAC KINNON 559 Russell Avenue (Continued) ■) REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, JULY 14, 1980Mayor Van Nest moved, Hannah seconded, to draft a resolution for the Andrew Goetten property, 1385 Fox Street, stating that one unit to be assessed as one unit for existing home; existing unit shall not be located on less than one acre parcel. Any future created parcels will meet two-acre unsewered zoning regulations. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). Paurus moved, Butler seconded, to draft a resolution for the Douglas Skarp property. West Ferndale Road, Page^ 15 ANDREW GOETTEN 1385 Fox Street DOUGLAS SKARP West Ferndale Road that one unit be assessed. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). Staff was requested to investigate the assessment distribution for the Windward Marine and Minnetonka Boat Works Marinas. Mayor Van Nest moved, Paurus seconded, to draft a resolution that the property of David Duff, 1420 Shoreline Drive, be excluded from the proposed sewer project. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). Mayor Van Nest moved, Hannah seconded, to draft a resolution that the property of William or Stanley X Gregory, 1410 Shoreline Drive, be excluded from the J proposed sewer project. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). Mayor Van Nest moved, Hannah seconded, to draft a resolution that the property for the Nature Conservancy be excluded from the proposed sewer project. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). Mayor Van Nest moved, Butler seconded, to draft a resolution that the property of Marie H. Hamm, Orono Lane, be assessed one unit. Motion, Ayes (5) Nays (0). Mayor Van Nest moved, Hannah seconded, to draft a resolution for the property of George Rector, 2655 North Shore Drive, be assessed one unit. Guest cottage to be used as an accessory structure only and not ac a rental unit. Restrictions to be entered in chain ot title. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). WINDWARD MARINE MINNETONKA BOAT WORKS DAVID DUFF 1420 Shoreline Drive WILLIAM/STANLEY GREGO: 1410 Shoreline Drive NATURE CONSERVANCY MARIE H. HAMM Orono Lane GEORGE RECTOR 2655 North ‘.h ;re Drive L ■ ^ J f ♦ CITYof ORONO J^lunkipal Offices Post Office Box 66 Co’^ Bay. Minnesota 553Z>0066 October 19, 1992 Mr. Paul W. Anderson Attorney at Law Messerli and Kramer 1500 Northland Plaza Bid 3. 3800 West 80th Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 Re: Andrew Goetten Subdivision Dear Mr. Anderson: I was able to spend some time searching through our files and was able to extract a number of documents relating to the Goetten property in 1980 and 1981. Some of the documentation does not pertain directly to the subdivision issue. That which does may not add much clarity to the situation. My recommendation is that you proceed with the concurrent subdivision/rezoning applications, the deadline for which is noon on Friday, October 23rd. As we discussed, your survey and septic testing would have to be submitted not more than a week after the application deadline. Inherent in your request would be a concurrent proposal by the City for rezoning of the Minnetonka Bluffs area. Please feel free to contact me at 473-7357 if you have any questions. Sincerely Michael P. Gaffron Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator MPG/ch Enc. TELEPHONE - 473-7357 • FAX - 4734510 --------•4c A *• iwnu.Itrrfau ---s*^fiJUtorr O.t^ -2o_- W9l 0.V7 OMl 3.IZ.!.*!•1 0.7 B 0,lt> if,I2,^C m 0.17 0.^1 r.-Ji£i t»0.^1 b,lt*IS M fl.31 O.ll 7.—l3flQ Fax' Sr-.n>ts-_o.wr ?•—13HC m D.^0.30 1 N o.W limbs • ^Lot .OS’t /.art JL_1 3^0 t*o.i/v o.w 4*__£Q0l NA ailoa J D.fS^ li.rzo * M o.n d.n -iii.—JEiL ti D.sn D.S9 /f*$30 •«A./I _0.// SJH «0. */r _0.*/$ n*Sk$m 0. </r A 9S' II*ffPJL L02^ lit rta M (V*c)n.Gi —0.S3 $00 OttMO 0*144 /tk . 1 . 0 ftR 0.06 M-SQO • •0 SI 11.sso •*O.c*^* 1**s-io • •/>. S1 o.s*? rt $1%Cui$«u DMii>.O.Vt. >,tf.SH^hr ••0.«/3 ->O.fS I3.»l - —r (2© QS5 .A« > (h^W7\ .*• sTsm \iof 15. aooi ii jj lil»KI(HU auTFS DHC wtr:T»j Ihi *. m^ 5 * 3fSr7>|^RjC 3iHt'''lFK^lfn;M!E a^:«^:i:?Hiiin: UK '4r M TTr-;! w-vc n*' B k ^ua ) s "* BA^ ^.ofTS exceec>/AJCM 2..0ac Mca cajitaz /a J /vius>^ 5 No/os n J 4* O' To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator i4 COUNCIL Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administr^jt^p^ ^ ^ |g02 December 9, 1992 Prom: Date:cmroFORONO Subject:#1785, #1781/1782 and #1783/1784 David Carlson - 600, 610 and 620 Big Island - Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution, Variances and Conditional Use Permits Brief Review of Application Mr. Carlson's comprehensive land use application consists of a lot line rearrangement involving three substandard parcels approved by ordinance for seasonal dwelling use located at 600, 610 and 620 Big Island. The lot line rearrangement provides Lots 600 and 610 with lakeshore yards. Historically these properties have had residential docks and have been used as lakeshore lots (review Exhibits E and F). The subdivision also provides for the sharing of an on-site septic system on both Lots 1 and 2. Tanks are located on Lot 1. Drainfield area is within Lot 2. All are located above the 931.5 or flood plain elevation. The use has been approved by the on ­ site septic manager. Sharing of the septic system will require the execution of a covenant/easement providing for the shared use and maintenance of the septic system and septic tanks. The septic system has been designed to serve a four-bedroom use level. Each cabin on Lots 1 and 2 will be limited to two-bedroom level use. The existing cabin on Lot 2 is located approximately 4* from the newly placed side lot .i f le. This cabin will be removed and a new cabin reinstalled meeting the 10* setback. Review of Applicatlous #1781/1782 and 11783/1784 Applicant proposes the installation of new seasonal cabins on Lots 1 and 2 that will be located within the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka requiring special fotindations that allow for water to flow freely beneath the structure. Review Exhibit S. Note the properties are located on a peninsula. To install new structures on both Lots 1 and 2, an average lakeshore setback variance is required and a conditional use permit and variance as cabins will be located within the flood plain, a protected area. It should be noted that both DNR and MCWD will not allow filling within the flood plain and will approve only frost depth footings for each of the cabins. A variance to Section 10.31, Subd. A will be required as all new construction on Big Island must be placed on a solid support foundation. ~ ^ ^ Zoning Applications #1785, 1761/1782, 1783/1784 December 9, 1992 Page 2 Planning COTnlssion Recomendation The Plahnlng Commission unanimously approved the lot line rearrangement and variances and conditional use permits for new construction on proposed Lots 1 and 2. The Planning Commission adopted the conditions of approval set forth by staff in the attached staff memos. Councllmembers are vicouraged to review the enclosed memo for greater detail. Council Action The enclosed preliminary subdivision approval resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission's recommendation. Please note that the resolutions for variance and conditional use permits for the new construction on Lots 1 and 2 cannot be drafted until the final plat is presented for Council's action. As for Application #1781/1782 and #1*83/1784, Council may provide conceptual direction to staff to provide the required approval resolutions at the time the subdivision is presented for final Council approval at a later date. Isv A RBSOLDTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OP A PLAT OP THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 600, 610 AND 620 BIG ISLAND PILE NO. 1785 flHEREAS, David R. Carlson (hereinafter "the applicant") on October 23, 1992 filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of the creation of a private eaement for the purpose of sharing the use of an on*-site septic system and a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement of properties legally described as Lots 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and RESERVE, "Pleasant View at Lake Minnetonka," Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter "the property") and? WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 16, 1992 at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and t WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on December 14, 1992 the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of David R. Carlson, (hereinafter "the subdivider"), noting the following findings of fact: 1.The property is located within the RS, Seasonal Recreational Zoning District requiring a minimum of 5 acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2.The purpose of this subdivision is to rearrange lot lines in order to improve building envelopes for new construction and for existing structures and improvements. The subdivision does not create a new buildable lot. 3.Per Section 10.31, Subd. C (1), lot line rearrangements between the abutting RS properties will not create an additional building site. 4.The proposed lot line rearrangement has been found to satisfy the required standards set forth in Section 10.31, Subd. 7 and does not reduce lot width to less than 50* in width. Page 1 of 4 A 5, Per Section 10.31, Subd. 18 (E), this subdivision will not reduce any required setback to less than 10*. The seasonal dwelling at 610 Big Island shall be removed and replaced with a new structure that meets the required 10’ setback from the newly proposed shared lot line between Lots 2 and 3. 6. The proposed lot line rearrangement will provide 600 and 610 Big Island with legal lakeshore yard areas as properties have historically been used as riparian to Lake Minnetonka. NOW, THBRBPORB BB IT RBSOLVBD, that based upon either one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of David R. Carlson for the properties located at 600, 610 and 620 Big Island per the survey dated February 14, 1992, revised September 1, 1992, by Theodore D. Kemna of Schoell and Madson, Inc., subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant to execute a covenant/easement providing for the shared use of septic system and septic tanks located on Lots 1 and 2. Such document should include the location of the septic system and tanks with special precaution to protect drainfield sites during construction with the need to stake the area prior to any land alteration. Covenants must also contain language limiting cabins to two-bedroom level use. Covenant/easement must be in a form suitable for filing against the Chain of Title of both properties. 2. Applicant shall provide a removal date for the razing of the existing cabin on Lot 2 as Section 10.31, Subd. 18 (E) will not allow a setback less than 10* from an interior lot line. The current cabin is located approximately 4* from the newly designated shared lot line between Lots 2 and 3. All new construction shall meet the setback requirements for shoreland properties and of the RS district. PINAL PLAT SUBMITTALS The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month: 1. Page 2 of 4 RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"=200'. Please note mylars must be signed by all persons with an interest in the property. Drawing to include: A.Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Theodore D, Kemna dated February 14, 1992, revised September 1, 1992. B.Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 5* wide along all perimeter and interior lot lines. 2. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: A.Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. B.The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. C.Signed and executed covenant/easement required in Condition 1 noted above. Such covenant/easement to be in a form suitable for filing against the Chain of title of both properties. 3. PEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $200.00 A. Legal review and filing fees of $200.00 Page 3 of 4 .•Its? Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono/ Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 14th day of December, 1992. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of December, 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson 6 Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk c? the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 4 To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse# City Administrator V. From: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator November 13, 1992 Subject:A, #1785 David Carlson, 600, 610 and 620 Big Island Class II Preliminary Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Involving the Creation of an Easement for the Sharing of a Septic System - Public Hearing Zoning District: RS Pertinent Ordinances 1. Chapter 11/Class II Subdivision A.Section 11.02 - Definition 66 (A) - Creation of a private easement and lot line rearrangements involving properties that do not meet the standard of the RS district require subdivision review. Subdivisions of this type are classified as Class II. B.Section 10.31, Subd. 2 (A) - Seasonal dwelling. One family detached dwelll.igs used for seasonal recreational use not to exceed 180 days in any one year and not to be owner's principal residence for homestead tax credit purposes. 600 Big Island per Record Lot inventory * .23 acres Approved lot area variance = Resolution No. 1536 610 Big Island per Record Lot inventory = .68 acres No resolution of record approving lot area but area variance has been officially recognized in record lot inventory. 620 Big Island per Record Lot inventory = .97 acres Approved lot area variance = Resolution No. 1998 All of the above have been approved for seasonal dwelling^^iEach of the Record Lots has a seasonal dwelling. Lot area varainces have been granted in ordinance. C.Section 10.31, Subd. C (1) - Lot line rearrangements between abutting RS properties that do not create an additional building site will normally be approved. D.Section 10.31, Subd. 7 - No existing lot of record shall be reduced by any lot line rearrangement to less than 50* in width measured at the shoreline and at the building site. Lots ^OOand 610 Big Island technically not lakeshore lots m^lsured at the 30* street setback as follows: Zoning File #1785 November 13, 1992 Page 2 Existing Proposed at 75 Setback 600 Big Island 610 Big Island 620 Big Island = 38* = 73* « 90*at 75' setback line 120 •7/ None of the lots are reduced to less than 50* result of the lot line rearrangement. as a E.Section 10.31, Subd. 12 - On-site sewage treatment systems required. A complete on-site sewage treatment system including lumbing fi>tures, two sealed septic tanks and underground drainfi/:ld designed, constructed and maintained in full conformance with the on-site sewage treatement code is required on all properties in the RS district as follows. . . "4. Serving all dwellings, buildings or structures containing a water activated toilet regardless of the type or duration of use or occupancy.* Section 10.31, Subd. 18 (E) - Tl. • shall be no setback exceptions permitted that reduce any required setback to less than 10*. 610 Big Island or proposed Lot 2's existing structure will be less than 10' from shared lot line between Lots 1 and 2. Applicant proposes new structure to be placed 10' from lot line. List of Exhibits - Subdivision Application P. A - B - C - D - E - F - Application Plat Map Property Owners List Weckman Memo Survey/Existing Property Survey/Proposed Discussion At the time applicant commissioned a survey of the property, it was discovered that 600 and 610 Big Island did not own their lakeshore. Each of the properties has a residential dock. Mr. Carlson, during the review of his variance application (#1745) earlier this year, also discovered that his property had no suitable area for development of an on-site septic system to serve his existing cabin proposed for major improvement. Members will recall that the application was tabled in June of 1992 and applicant was advised to consider relocating structure out of the 75' setback area. Aa applicant's addendum notes. Exhibit A-1, he has acquired 610 Big Island via Contract for Deed and now Zoning File #1785 November 13, 1992 Page 3 proposes a realignment of all three properties whereby proposed Lots 2 and 3 will have lakeshore. The existing structure on Lot 3 will now meet the required 10’ setback from the side lot line where structure had originally encroached into 610 Big Island approximately 1-2', The existing structure on Lot 2 is located approximately 4’ from the newly proposed side lot line between Lots 2 and 3. Per Section 10.31, Subd. 18 (E), no setback can be reduced to less than 10'. The proposed lot line arrangment can not be approved unless applicant proposes the removal and replacement with a conforming structure. Refer to Exhibit F. Proposed Lot 1 provides applicant with higher and dryer elevations to north increasing the building envelope. Based on lot widths, proposed Lot 1 will be required to meet a 30' interior lot line setback based on the 120' width measured at the intersection of the side lot lines with the 75' setback line. Proposed Lots 2 and 3, because their lot widths are less than 100' in width, will be required to meet a 10' interior lot line setback. As proposed Lot 3 is located adjacent to a street at both the north lot line and the south lot line, a 30* setback would be required if new construction was proposed. The second part of the subdivision application involves the creation of easements for the purpose of sharing an on-site septic system. The drainfield area is to be located on proposed Lot 2 with tanks installed on proposed Lot 1. Please review Exhibit D, weekman's memo, both Lots 1 and 2 are proposed for new construction with cabins having two bedrooms, bathrooms and kitchen sink. On-site sewage treatment is required. Test information confirms adequate area for a four bedroom mound system. A 10' setback variance will be required between the shared lot lines of proposed Lots 2 and 3 because septic tanks do not meet the required 20' setback from shared lot line. Each of the parcels will grant easements in favor of each other to allow the shared use and maintenance of the septic system. Weekman notes this is the only suitable area on both properties for septic use and that no alternate site is available but finds no problem as cabins are seasonal and would not be used to capacity for extended periods. The sharing of a septic system would not be in conflict with the MPCA or the City of Orono on-site septic standards. In fact, this may be a solution for several properties on Big Island where outhouses exist and do not conform to the required separation distance to OHWL - such as the outhouses on both of these properties. Staff has conditioned approval of this shared septic system based on the granting of mutual easements and subject to the limitation of the number of bedrooms to two for both properties. It is also suggested that covenants define location of test site on property in order to assure protection during construction and with future seasonal recreational use. Zoning File #1785 November 13, 1992 Page 4 Staff has been advised that all three parcels have no independent water supplies but are served from another property. Lots 1 and 2 will be served by individual wells at the time of new construction. ndation Any recommendation of approval must include the following conditions: I 1. 2. 3. 4. Applicant to execute a covenant/easement providing for the shared use of septic system and septic tanks located on both properties. Such document should Include the location of the septic system and tanks with special precaution to protect drainfield site during construction with the need to stake the area prior to any land alteration.^ Most important, the cabins shall be limited to two bedroom level use. Covenant/easement must be in a form suitable for filing against the Chain of Title of the properties. Applicant shall provide a removal date for the razing of the exlsitng cabin on Lot 2 as Section 10.31, Subd. 18 (E) will not allow a setback less than 10* from an Interior lot line. The current cabin is located approximately 4'. All new construction shall meet the setback requirements for lakeshore properties and of the RS district. Applicant shall grant 5* drainage and utility easements along all perimeter property lines and along the shared lot lines and to be omitted at the shoreline. Note City is not asking for 10* along perimeter lot lines because of the substandard setback of seasonal cabin on Lot 3 where lot line has not been altered. Zoning File #1785 November 13, 1992 Page 5 Applications #1781 and #1782 620 Big Island - Variancres and Conditional Ose Permit Applications #1783 and #1784 610 Big Island - Variances and Conditional Ose Permit Pertinent Ordinances 1. Section 10.55, Subd. 4 (B) - Flood fringe district. The flood fringe district shall include those areas designated as floodway fringe in the Flood Isurance Study including without limitation the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka between elevations 929.4 and 931.5, the area between the floodway and the edge of the 100-year flood elevation. Review Exhibit S. Note that new construction will be located entirely within flood fringe area. Septic tanks and drainfield areas are located above the flood plain elevation at 931.5 2. Section 10.55, Subd. 7 (B) - The regulatory flood protection elevation for Lake Minnetonka shall be 932.5 MSL. 3. Section 10.55, Subd. 8 - Development restricted. No filling, grading, temporary or permanent structures will be allowed within the flood plain. 4. Section 10.55, Subd. 10 - Permitted and conditional use permits. Only structures allowed within flood fringe area are listed under conditional uses. They are accessory *^tructures such as open decks and patio or other accessory uses not specifically listed when approved by the Council but no use shall be approved which will restrict or obstruct any flood flow or which will raise the level of any flood flow. Seasonal structure use is not addressed. 5. Section 10.55, Subd. 14 (B) - Conditions attached to conditional use permits. Flood proofing measures in accordance with State Building Code and Federal Flood Regulations - Applicant shall submit the plan or document certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the flood proofing measures are consistent with the regulatory flood protection elevation and associated flood factors for the particular area. This section suggests more intense structure than decks and patios. 6. RS Standards - Section 10.31, Subd. 8 - Required setbacks. Refer to Exhibit F. Street = 30' Interior lot lines = 30' with lot widths at 100-199' Interior lot lines = 10' with lot widths at 1-99' Zoning File #1785 November 13, 1992 Page 6 Lot 1 Required = 75' Proposed * 75' Required interior lot line = 30 Proposed *» 30' Lot 2 Required = 75' Proposed =* 75' Required interior lot line = 10' Proposed = 10' 7. Section 10.31, Subd. 9 > Lakeshore hardcover regulations. 75-250' setback area Lot 1/620 Big Island Total area » 11,880 s.f. Allowed ai 2,970 s.f. or 25% Proposed » 1,926 s.f. or 16.21% Lot 2/ Total area = 17,280 s.f. Allowed =• 4,320 s.f. Proposed > 1,409.25 s.f. or 8.15% 8. Section 10.31, Subd. 10 - All structures limited to 30' in height. Lot 1 structure proposed at 28' height Lot 2 structure proposed at 23' height 9. Section 10.31, Subd. 11 - Building construction standards. A. Foundations required. All new or remodeled seasonal dwellings or guest cabins and all principal dwellings shall be placed on a permanent frost depth (42”) solid masonry or treated wood foundation that completely encloses the entire perimeter of the building. Also consider Section 10.55, Subd. 11 which directs that no structure, temporary or permanent, will adversely affect the capacity of the floodway or Increase flood height. Permanent frost depth foundation would be In complete conflict of directives of flood plain regulatory guideline. All construction shall be subject to Section 10.31, Subd. 11 (A-G). 10. Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (B) - Average lakeshore setback variance required - 0 encroachment. Zoning File #1785 November 13, 1992 Page 7 Lot 1 Lot 2 Proposed = 90' Prposed = 23* List of Exhibits - Variances and Conditional Dse Permits G - Application #1781 H - Application #1782 I - Hardcover Fact Sheets J - Planning C'^mirlssion Minutes 6/5/92 K - DNR Letter 11/5/92 L - Elevations M - Floor Plan N - Application #1783 0 - Application #1784 P “ Hardcover Fact Sheets Q - Foundation Plans R - Elevations and Floor Plans S - Staff Sketch Review of Application #1781/1782 Mr. Carlson has now located the new seasonal cabin out of the 75' setback area meeting the required interior lot line setback of 30'. The structure is completely located within the flood fringe area of Lake Minnetonka (929.4 > ^Jl.5). The first habitable floor must be placed at the reg'-xatory flood plain elevation of 932.5. The applicant has also applied for a permit from the MCWD to determine if compensatc'ry excavations will be necessary. Staff has been in contact with the Watershed District and they have advised that they concur wxth the DNR directives. Review Exhibit K - Richter's letter reconfirms that fill will not be used to elevate structure and that cabin must be securely anchored by a foundation designed by either a certified architect or engineer which allows water to flow freely beneath the structure. Review Exhibit Q *■ the foundation plan for both structures has been designed by licensed architect and provides for frost depth footings with screen/mesh panels along perimeter. In order to meet the intent of the RS district, he is providing screening along the perimeters of the structure to prevent destruction by animals. A variance is requested to allow proposed foundation where RS district requires permanent frost depth foundation of either solid masonry or treated wood foundation that completely encloses entire perimeter of building. Applicant has filed a conditional use permit/variance application to permit foundation to be placed below the 931.5 elevation. In reviewing the survey prepared by Ted Kemnar of Schoell and Madsdn, the shoreline has been shown on three dates. The darkened line has been confirmed at the 929.72 elevation on February 12, 1992. The 929.4 elevation would be out further somewhat slightly below the second lighter line shown at 929.5. Zoning File #1785 November 13, 1992 Page 8 The applicant has the option to revise survey so that setback can be extended lakeward. The seasonal cabin has been designed with a loft area. Height has been taken to the top of the structure measuring 28' total height. The maximum height for seasonal dwelling proposed in excess of 800 s.f. with a water-activated toilet requires on­ site sewage treatment system. The existing cabin on Lot 1 is located within both the lakeshore protected area and the flood plain. Review of Application §1783/1784 - Lot 2 610 Big Island As applicant's addendum notes, he is in the process of purchasing property with a Contract for Deed. It is Mr. Carlson's intention to build a new structure within the proposed building envelope. Review Exhibits R and S. The existing cabin is located out of the lakeshore protected area but within the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka. Applicant must provide deadline date for removal of existing "now" non-conforming structure. Mr. Carlson has advised that the structure is not worth saving and must be demolished. The structure is shown at a maximum height at 23'. Foundation for the seasonal cabin on Lot 2 will be of the same type of design as the one to be Installed on Lot 1. Once again the MCWD has stated that compensatory excavations will not be required as long as the design of the structure will allow water to flow freely beneath it. Recooswiidatlon Any recommendation of approval must include the following conditions: 1. Upon application for a building permit, applicant must provide the following: A. Foundation design by either a certified architect or engineer. B. Permit from the MCWD. C. Topographic detail confirming elevation of first habitable floor (minimum 932.5). D, Drainage plan to include erosion control. Such measures must be in place during the construction. Zoning File #1785 November 13, 1992 Page 9 2.In the case of the seasonal dwelling on Lot 2, applicant must provide a reasonable deadlin' date for their removal of the structure. 3.All building construction shall be subject to all pertinent standards as set forth in Section 10.31, Subd. 11 of the RS District. If Applications #1781, #1782, #1783 and #1784 are to be approved, the following variances 1.Variance to average lakeshore setback line. 2.Variance to allow excavations and structures where no such activities are allowed (Section 10.55, Subd. 8). 3.Variance to allow frost depth footing and not a solid support foundation (Section 10.31, Subd. A). and a conditional use permit for land alterations within protected area. Isv -M- 'M CITX OF OROHO - SOBg^loJ^FPLl^TloC^A- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ij^ f D ^ A2 O. /j/^ Property Identification Nxunber (P.I.D.) Please check one - Property X abstract or pAij t¥i^^ouct> /p n'^ -X3-3/ -C02}, ;/7-J3~3> '-OOiJ -va- m-2.3-3h cci*f ^:^07-J3-3/-M^£ Jt 7-2.3-~ co/6 ___ torrens? ^ Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT Phone (home) SD Name D amId /?. t\i Phone (work ) 9. ?V~ 3 Address; City; Z)^jA//vc^jt/i(2. Zipt ifyi^ ONNER (if different than applicant) s. Phoney (home) ~~ 93¥3 Pav'( O Ca^iiCA/ C^ec^Sa'^S/ Name C.Jf3.AleiS 1.-^ Pese/ooJ ^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _^ Phone (work) ~*44^/«3..^ AddressAZip; (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size /.^L> Present Use (check)X mo2oom Acres Dry Land 01 325.C Acres Wet Land w/ttEfl 71 1075.0'. Acres Total, all parcelsii£C£IPT~THm YOU s e fs o ^aL . . COOl m T15:£Residential; no. of units _______ Other (specify)_____________________ Present Zoning District •tVf23/9. PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes X Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites: Proposed Gross Density: Minimxjm Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) Existing Units New Units Total Units ^ ^ v Units per / ^^cres /S'2^0 Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land _ Residential Other (specify)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ — - -»- NIHIMDM MATERIAL MECBSSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). As an addendum to this applicatlonr please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 2. 3. 4. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1. Payment of fees (park feesr filing fee, sewer and water assessments). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FEES Sketch Flan Review (Class I, II & III) Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) Preliminary Review (Class III & all non-residential) Final Plat Review (Class III) *(Plu3 any legal or engineering charges) Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application Renewal of Final Subdivision Application $200.00 300.00 300.00 325.00 + 25.00/Lot 175.00 150.00 100.00 The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all .additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature MLi^ Date Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. i: r hr' '■i-fa*- if ;;s., f f.: irm-'- fr^'- ;r ■;?•' fi M ' ■r*-Vir; -.. . » y 7.•yrv*Tr:«: « f A-/ .• t October 23, 1992 Jj 1 City of Orono Planning and Zoning Commission City Council Members Re: Big Island Proposal David Carlson is making application proposing: 1. A lot line rearrangement. 2. A seasonal dMelling replacement. 3. Installation of a new septic system and orain field. The property is referred to as 610 and 620, Big Island. (See attached illustration.) The property known as 620, Big Island is owned by David Carlson The property known as 610, Big Island is owned by Charles L. Pegelow. Lot No. 18.Pleasant View at Lake Minnetonka, which is adjacent to the Pegelow Property, is owned by Or. George Adams. David Carlson has a purchase agreement to purchase the Pegelow property on a Contract for Deed contingent to the approval of the subject proposal. David Carlson is requesting approval to remove the existing cabin on the property known as 620, Big Island and to build a new cabin. Blue prints for the new cabin are attached. Land use and zoning variance applications are being submitted. A new septic system has been designed to meet all regulations and will be shared by cabins on parcels 610 and 620, Big Island Two current outhouses will be eliminated. Details of the installation as well as site evaluation and test reports are attached. A new well will be installed on the 620 parcel as illustrated on the drawings. No well will be located within 75 feet of the septic system. On Pegelow*s property (610, Big Island parcel), there is an existing cabin that David Carlson will tear down and replace with the now existing cabin on the 620, Big Island property, or build a new cabin. Both cabins (on 610 and 620) will have frost footings. .^■4 .AkL..—k.-.. - r s.. :-v ;r ll i'- It I' r' It '|v V r JV-‘m A- The owner of Lot 18, Pleasant View at Lake Minnetonka, has a stairway from his cabin that encroaches the Pegelow property (610, Big Island). David Carlson has made arrangements to deed to that owner a strip of land providing him more shoreline and eliminating his encroachment on other property. Land use applications, zoning and variance applications and a Class III Subdivision application together with required materials and information have been submitted. yours. David R. Carlson 2400 Mayflower Avenue Minnetonka, MN 55326 Telephone: 541-1650 HI i 58 22-117-25 24 000100720 BIG ISLANDTRISTIN 0 LRICKSOT4 ET ALTRISTIN 0 ERICKSON2650 MARSHLAND ROADNAVZATA m 5559138 22-117-25 24 000600058ADDRESS Ur4ASSIGf4EDSHERYL RAMSTAD HVASSSHERYL RAMSTAD HVASS12120 GOLDEN ACRE DRMir4r4ETONKAm5554538 22-117-25 51 00100065C BIG ISLA44DDOUGLAS E PER30t4 ET AL N/LJEFFREY A PERSON17345 9TH AVE NPLYMOUTH MN 5544738 22-117-23 31 0013 00610 BIG ISLAND CHARLES LEROY P£GELO»>l CHARLES L PEGELOH 12215 45TH AVE N MPLS MN 55442 38 22-117-2.^ 51 0016 00600 BIG ISLAND GAD ADAMS GEORGE A DONNA ADAMS 10512 TOLEDO AVE BLOOrtINGTOri MN 55457 38 22-117-23 51 0026 00660 BIG ISLAND ELIZABETH FOSTER SALISBURY BETTY F PRir4CE C/O GWEN S MYERS 9705 BRIARWOOD CIR SUN CITY AZ 85351 HErt4EPIt4 COUNTY PROPERTY INF0RMAT:0N SYSTEMPROPERTY OU4ERS LIST58 22-117-23 24 000400680 PIG ISLANDW BRYSON A T BRYSOf4WILLIAM A THELMA BRYSON3015 KIMBERLEY LAPLY4tOUTH MT4 5544738 22-117-25 31 000200560BIG IrLANDDOr4 HENDERSON ET ALDON HCr4DERSON5018 riORMANOALE CTMPLS m 5545638 22-117-23 31 001100630 BIG ISLANDDOUGLAS E PERSON ET AL W/LJEFFREY A PERSOJ417545 9TH AVE NPLYMOUTH hU4 5544738 22-117-23 31 0014 00610 BIG ISLAND CHARLES L PEGELOW CHARLES L PEGELOl'l 12215 45TH AVE N PLYMOUTH MN 55442 38 22-117-25 31 0020 00590 BIG ISLAND J D FIEGcR a J M FIEGER JAMES FIEGER 5111 HOLIDAY RD MIt4TJETONKA MT4 55345 38 22-117-23 31 0027 00650 BIG ISLAND JAMES A R JOIlNSOt4 JAMES A R J01ir4S0N 2800 DENTON BLVD MPLS MN 55416 K RFPC . NO. P1436<i01PAGE 1658 22-117-25 2«* 000500670 BIG ISLANDH E BRYSON STL BRYSOfJWILLIAM S THELMA BRYSON5015 Kir®ERLY LAPLVttOUTH fW 55<«<«750 22-117-23 31 000900630 BIG ISLANDOOllGLAS E PERSON ET AL H/LJEFFREY A PERSON17395 9T»| AVE NPLYMOUTH MN 5599730 22-117-23 31 001200610 BIG ISLANDCHARLES LEROY PEGELOWCHARLES L PEGELOH12215-95TH AVE HOMPLS MN 5599230 22-117-23 31 0015 00610 DIG ISLAND CHARLES L PEGELOW CHARLES L PEGELOW 12215 95TH AVE N PLYMOUIH MN 55992 38 22-117-23 31 0025 00620 BIG ISLAND PAULINE VANDERHOOF DAVID R S JAN W CARLSON 2290 DHIGHT LA MimETONKA MN 55393 30 22-117-23 31 0028 00650 BIG ISLAND JANES A R JOHNSON JAMES A R JOHIFSOtF P 0 BOX 15265 MPLS MN 55915 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OI^RS LIST58 22-117-25 51 0050006^0 BIG ISLAND CLINT»4 KNUDSON CLINTON KNUDSON 1825 FRAtJKLIN AVE S E MPLS UN 55<*14005 00021 58 22-117-25 51 005100580 BIG ISLAND J D A J M FIEGER JAMES D FIEGER 5111 HOLIDAY RD MINNETONKA MN 555A5 I certify that the facts represented ARE an accurate and true REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE MErtlEPIN COUNTY OEPARTM|NT/OF PROPERTY Ji^<ATION» TO>TfiE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DTo; Prom: Date: Subject: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Stephen Weckman, On-Si.^ Systems Manager November 2, 1992 Septic Review - Application #1745, David Carlson Both 610 and 620 Big Island have cabins which are not attached to on-site sewage treatment systems. Human wastes are treated by outhouses which are located very near lake level. The cabins have sinks which drain to the surface. Neither the outhouses nor sinks meet Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and City of Orono standards for waste disposal. The proposed cabin at 620 Big Island has two bedrooms, a bathroom and a kitchen sink requiring the use of an on-site sewage treatment system, however soil testing indicates that a 1' separation from the seasonally high water table is not achievable on this lot. The adjacent property, 610 Big Island, has been acquired by the applicant to provide a suitable area for on-site sewage treatment for both properties. The cabin at 610 Big Island is in poor condition and will be replaced with a 2-bedroom cabin as well. Soil testing and system design has been approved for a Type 2, 2-bedroom home for each cabin (225 gal/day/cabin). The system meets MPCA and most City ordinances. A variance will be required for a 10' setback from the mound s ’ te to the east and west property lines of 610 Big Island. A i^j' setback variance will also be required between the septic tanks and the lot line between 610 and 620 Big Island. The proposed soil treatment area is suitable for a mound and lies entirely within the redefined ^ot lines of 610 Big Island property. The proposed tanks lie within redefined lot lines of 620 Big Island. Therefore, isements will be required on each property for the shared use and maintenance of the septic system. Due to the site slope and water table conditions, the proposed sewage treatment site is the only area available for these two properties. Although no alternate site is available, the proposed septic system will provide a means of sewage treatment for both properties wh’ch will meet the new DNR Shoreland Regulations. As the use of these cabins will be on a seasonal basis and would not likely be used to capacity for extended periods of time, =»r alternate site may not be necessary. Staff will approve the required septic variances provided the easements for the use of the on-site sewage treatment system can be provided. A condition limiting the number of bedrooms to two on both properties should be included since no area is available to expand the drainfield area. Isv 44'il jLCITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION if Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 ^ (p (no change from original application) n Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION o 1 «■ O i rTTv nc rtQPkin f I k.‘i LY\i\kirL nccrrc I Ut t 1 A h/w'Vi. V'VWVn i rrvVA k?Wlt 175.0C' Site Address_ _ _ Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.)——3/ ^ ^ Attach legal description to application included on required survey. H^S^HVtz^ Date Property Acquired •* (month/year) I «B(do not) also own the Adjacent parcels of land. Pre^nt use of property: _ _ _residential _ _ _other (specify) - - - - Zoning District_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ APPLICANT Name nAi/fJ 7?. Phone (home) Phone (worlc) 93¥3 Address . ^/y)39-^/060<g*if City; __ Zip: JTS'3¥3 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ^ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ Phone (home) Phone (wor)c) Zip:Address: _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Cxty:_ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _—- - - -- - - - - - - - -—- - - - -—- - - - - -- - - -—- - - --- - - - - - Estimated Construction Cost $. Ca-A^—~DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail :------------------------ . ^ "‘pTn'Xr^rs.^TTiTSnliss'Yj ZYZrZoi- -S VARIANCES REQUIRED ^ Lot Area Setbac)c: Lot Width Front Hardcover __ _Lot Coverage Side Rear _ _ Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zon-ng Cede requxremen s.- - - - - (attach additional sheets if necessary)REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of -the following infonnation must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered conplete; 1. __Completed Application Form 2. __Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. _Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. __Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8*j"xll'’ for reproduction). 5. ___^Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8J5"xll''). 6. _S)cetches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8%"xll"), 7. _^As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. _Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that yoor variance application is not: complete if the above infor»a-tlon has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and corrfc^ to the best of his/her Icnowledge. Applicant's Signature rrect to the Date ONNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ac)cowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga ­ tion and verification of« this request. Owner's Signature or« rnxs reqMx Date /oIt^Z Ay 1 Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month.' Applicants must be present at all scheduled review neetings of the Planning ConnBisslon and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please malce arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. I CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Aj) /?/’ZTsJ,3AJc/#1 O ^ J ^ 4- Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Z/'? 3 - 3 / d>OZ.^ ^ Lcc^^h RSS£R\/£j PJesssM7 ^/^u> /yitM^cZoAJZ(B " Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name QpZ 1// D /? Address /JQ^ypJoc/f A Phone (home ) S~^/ ~/^STO Phone (work) ^3^~^8S3 iriTiiJ, City AZyyi/j^a:hAfX3. Zip OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Address Phone City Zip Date Property Acquired _ I (do not) also own djacent parcels of land. (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application $125.00 Residential accessory Use $175.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 Land Alteration /Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule Renewal Fee - $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $175.00 Easement Vacation $ 75.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision - - - - $300.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) $300.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment $100.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoninq District Present Use of Property _ _ _ Residential . Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST . Describe request in detail: /Bu^Ld A A^g 4^ >$’c</»/»7g/g 'P/^^s zl’-gAA // ^ UJ ci Sy£ -fTTAry // s --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obta this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Governme Center 348-3271), 3. Plat Map. 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARB REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPT (11* X 17* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and veri/flegation of this request. Owner's signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. ^7^ HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' (/WSO^ 250-500' Existing H ardcover in Zone 500-1000' • • A.. H ouse • X m S3 S.F. • •length X WIDTH ^ .4 <d S.F. *S5w‘ f'-J ■ ■'-w '-2-_____ X 7, c:-, =S.F. .(o'B_ X (2. * -7(S S.F. ^ f*~----^ X S.F. j C"- ^ % B.Garage X • S.F. C.Driveway X 3 S.F, ‘.. ■- J X 8 • • S.F. ' , - V-• 0.. • Sidewalk X • S.F. < \ SctSeCIrsiCO \*2- X \4- a I C-Pv S.F. \ '2, X 3C. = 4-52 S.F. E.Jatio / Deck - 12 X ». M4-S.F.• F.Landscape X • S.F. AREAS underlain BY X S.F. PLASTIC SHEETING X • • S.F. X 3 . S.F.• G. Other 3,S.F. Total Hardcover in Zone - Total Property A rea in Zone |g^2.(o U8P>c> li2jgS5- -f B il&Bo X 100 » 1 • F • .F. S % «» • •• *«•« -r' MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 15, 1992 («8) *1745 DAVID R. CARLSON, 620 BIG ISLAND - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 7:50 - 8:12 P.M. The Affidavit of Pub Iication and Certificate of Maiiing were noted. David Carlson was were present. Mabusth explained that a building inspection confirmed that the cabin Is constructed on pier footings 16" deep, 7.5’ on center, and do not meet existing standards. The applicant has submitted an amended plan which maintains hardcover at the existing amount. A setback variance for the 0-75’ area would need to be approved. Chair Kelley asked about the condition of the cabin. Mabusth reported that It is not as bad as adjacent structures. The cabin was built in 1963. The applicant proposes to replace the roof, siding and windows. She explained that the applicant has withdrawn his request for a holding tank and has agreed to remove the sink. The structure Is under 800 s.f. in area, and per Code, would be allowed an outhouse if the outhouse is able to meet all pertinent standards. Chair Kelley said that \f the building were being proposed in its present location today. It would be denied. He asked If the foundation can support the proposed improvements. Mabusth stated that the inspector confirmed that the foundation is adequate to support the existing structure, but would not comment on any future upgrades to the structure. Bellows suggested they require certification of the foundation by a structural engineer. Carlson requested that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the application with the condition that it be inspected by a structural engineer so the project will not be delayed. Peterson asked if Carlson proposed moving the building If the piers are found to be inadequate. Carlson reminded him that this is on an island, and it would be very difficult to make a vertical move. Mabusth noted the structure could be located further back on the property, but would still require Interior lot line setbacks. varIance. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 15, 1992 ZONING FILE #1745 - CONT. Bellows said she would be more amenable to such a request. Chair Kelley said that because of building, he would not be willing approval to the Council. the structural needs of the to make a recommendation of Rowlette noted that the repairs being proposed appear to exceed 50* of the valuation. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Rowlette, to recommend denial of Application #1745 for David Carlson, 620 Big Island, for variances, based on the fact that the proposed alterations exceed the allowed 50* limit and there Is available land to allow placement of a structure requiring less of a variance. Ayes 5, nays 0. Mabusth Informed Carlson that his application would now go to the Council with a recommendation of denial from the Planning Commission. She asked if he would rather have the application tabled to allow him time to revise his plan. Carlson asked that the application be tabled. It was moved by Bel lows, seconded by Rowlette, to withdraw the previous motion. Ayes 5, nays 0. It was moved by Bel lows, seconded by Rowlette to table AppiI cat ion #1745 for David Carlson of 620 Big Island, to allow the applicant time to amend his proposal. Ayes 5, nays 0. (§9) CHARLES CUDD COMPANY, 2110 SUGARWOOD DRIVE - REQUEST TO REVISE DRIVEWAY ALIGNMENT Mr. Bonner was present. Mabusth explained that standards were developed at the conception of Sugar Woods. This Is the Cudd Company’s first time building in Sugar Woods. The lot in question is the southern lot on the loop road with the retaining wall. There is a large bass wood on the property. Portions of the drive exceed the maximum allowed width of 20’ within the 50’ setback area. The building permit was Issued with the understanding that those standards would be met. The house has been located as far to the rear as possible as there is a sheer d rop behInd it. / / ^ STATE OF DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES IflEfRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN S5106 _ . . .-JNENO. 772-7910 FILENO "il Kovember 5, 1992 'NOV '12 David Carlson 2400 Mayflower Avenue Minnetonka, MN 55305 RE: CARLSON CABIN, BIG ISLAND, LAKE MINNETONKA (27-133P, #5), CITY OF ORONO, HENNEPIN COUNTY Dear Mr. Carlson: This letter is to confirm our discussion of September 28, 1992, concerning the construction of a cabin on Big Island in Lake Minnetonka (27-133P). The building site is within the floodplain of Lake Minnetonka, i.e. below the elevation of 931.5'. Therefore, the new cabin must be constructed with the lowest floor at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation (RFPE), which is at least 932.5'. (Check with the city of Orono on the minimum elevation; they may be more stringent than the minimum state requirement.) You indicated that fill would not be used to elevate the structure. Therefore, the cabin must be securely anchored by a foundation designed by either a certified architect or engineer which allows water to flow freely beneath the structure. In addition to the points above, the following DNR concerns should be noted: 1. The vegetation and topography should be retained in a natural state in th.e .'?7.5' shore impact zone of Lake Minnetonka. 2. The ordinary uigh water (OHW) level of 929.4'(NGVD, 1929) for Lake Minnetonka should be noted in future plans and plats. It is not clear whether the shoreline indicated is at the OHW or not. The 929.4' contour should also be shown since that is the critical elevation for building setbacks, limits of DNR authority, etc. 3. Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken during the construction period. The Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planning Handbook (Board of Water & Soil Resources and Association of Metropolitan Soil and Water Conservation Districts) guidelines, or their equivalent, should be followed. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER David Carlson November 5, 1992 Page 2 4.If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10,000 gallons per day or 1 million gallons per year, the contractor will need to obtain a DNR appropriations permit. You are advised that it typically takes approximately 60 days to process the permit application. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me or Area Hydrologist Ceil Strauss at 772-7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, jd. iCA/oHfc-'v. Joseph G. Richter Hydrologist cc:Minnehaha Creek WSD, Mike Panzer Joe Yanta, USCOE Jeanne Mabusth, City of Orono City of Orono Floodplain File r ; t C Av fSU'bOKl L Ak K E KA IKIN t*T c- N K> Av J& • n-t. I/S“ . I' O'* *5 oc*T H A^*.i *-»■«. 1 0 f1 fi 1 s |i . ri . t * . I CAvfiL-SoM L\Minketonk/s ^l ^-L • • 615<:L oUO PK^ofS 1/S'‘ •=fo • r/i>^ CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Tt “I i\ \ % $ n / L A*' ..I ,N# y 01V'a U4.I! Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) /’/ZP AJO/Tlic/eS xx-- U'j-'Jtl-Si ~oors A/o. -7.“‘,1- ^La t f 8 "OO /i> Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.)___ Attach legal description to application if, ^‘Ot included on required survey. /^U l-o^i '» pleMt,«T w 17=: .1 ( w*. V PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Date Property Acquired (month/year) I not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. , Present use of property; _ _ _residential _ _ _other(specify) CABi*i Zoning District;_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT Name DAUIO R. Phone (home) .^TV/ - Phone (work) ^ Address; /y]^u-PLu}^-j^ Ave^ City; Zip; OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) S~-3~9 “PS^3 Name iJJiApleS L, ___________ Phone (work) 3JSI ----- Address; Z.2.^ /5" 06, Afa, City; F/^yff&u/P _Zip:-^V/J, . Estimated Construction Cost ^ _ Describe request in detail; ** ‘ -----------^ ^—/ -i ---------- lc>r jL^a/<s^/^LL ooj (AJcfiK /aj FAt.oc) _______ DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST ---------jAA7Tr<TA/7 «T”79??*7nj ’Ii‘27 ”HT^5Lc/"XTFiiZ^ VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ Lot Area PfiOio fie/cj ^ Setback; V^ot Width Hardcover Front Side ~D Lot Coverage Rear *7^ Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property •conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requireme>.ts; (attach additional sheets if necessary)REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be siibmitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered completer 1. __Completed Application Form 2. ___Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. _Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. _Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8ij"xll" for reproduction). 5. ___Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8J5"xll"). 6. _ _Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8Jj"xll''). 7. _ _As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. _Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your vari^mce application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct Applicant's Signature the best of his/her knowledge. Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga­ tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month.* Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. ► CITY OP ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION i't' ./ i /') _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _4-1_ _^— -- - - - - - - - ;. ' V---, ^ -a.-, aa PROPERTY LOCATION ”7“ . i1 . / /.w.^ —-w site Address (:>/D . S/ O T~iXj__________________ ' uot /y - ia.-//y--2.3 Prooerty Identification Number (P. I »D« ) /s~- Aa-//7--3-3~3/~ 3 Lc*- /6 - ia.-//r-^3-3/-cjo/v 4.61- n - -2a-//7--zi-3/- 00/5^ 4<$.r / j '//7”4-^ *Please attach legal description to application it not included on required survey, p/edSA)J't <?/ /<5/re ________ APPLICANT Phone (home) _____ Name DAP/D /?■ ________^Phone (work) 9J^ ~'¥SS'3 -------- Address Al^s/P/oUie/^ City Ar'f,A/A)c^A//<z Zip S^3}£3— ___ OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) ~ - - - Name CJ\ 4 /? /.o L, r-^'^/otO Phone(^)^) .??J2. “ -1_ Address /JZ:i/r /9i/£. City Zip_S^Z±^ Date Property Acquired ___________________________ (month/year) I (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _ _ _ _ 5 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application _ _ _ _ $125.00 Residential accessory Use _ _ _ _ $175.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _ _ _ _ $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Coromercial/Industrial Use $200.00 Land Alteration — / Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more, Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore _ _ _ _ PRD/PID - see fee schedule Renewal Fee - $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees; $250.00 Vacation _ _ _ _ $175.00 Easement Vacation $ 75.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $300.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) $300.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _________ $100.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property _____ Residential , Other (specif v) hu.‘e.II/A:c DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST ^ ^ ' J Describe reqyest in detail: C, Neui £.3hf'f0 ^ 5y»> nu,^7l)Aj(.') COAJAiect A S'Aajtce/ -TyT-Ze/vi REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obta this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Governme Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map. 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan^ if applicable (see staff for requirements). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (ll* X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:__________________________________Date__________________ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the^b^t of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date lOixzhx. OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date :’’^\’;/licant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the ;■ 1 • .ling Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have^ an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. P/)F(C'^ L L>IO EiC TH.i'id/^Qf pj ^ I /•til ATTnti » fn ni/r*»HARDCOVER CALCULATIOfI WORKSHEET’ SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 0S-2SOO 250-500' 500-1000' .EvTg r-t-NG H ardcover in Zone "Total H ardcover in Zone \A.,^ '2JP S.F, Total P roperty Area in Zone '1,7- A O S.F. i A./^«9.2.s -f il in -2.so X 100 = ;cyTo H • • A■ HoUSc • X • S • F • • •length WIDTH • ■ 26 X • r or— ^ S.F. 12- X \'Z-S.F. * •• X S.F. X — mm S.F. B. Garage X S.F. r. Driveway • X S.F. X •• • • S.F. • n. Si dewalk X S.F. 7 X ( U.S ^2.57-T«=- S.F. X t r>f ^ O S • F i e. P atio / Deck 3 X mm' ^4 ^ .S S.F. • P. 1 AaVDSCAP^ • •• X 9 S.F. AREAS UNDERLAIN BY X ^ S.F. PLASTIC SHEETING •X — • • S.F. X • •• S.F. • G. Other X •ss S.F. \ v^j' - *; • o' o L>T H ^ U V \ o H V, o-T *2. • VA^MM^tomw^. JO • -tfr -TL. pAs-ST &l-BVAv “r\oH U.»-r 'L • ^A.^VlNB--To^4lC1^^ lo • l-t-. I ruoofi plam vs" ^ o" u C-r NMU\>i^0^iKK \ o ^ ft *^1- * O o 5 u 1 V- o ) Nr- C.<V ^ \ K4 ^ C~T \ O vl x<^.\ w>n' ■r .O'^V,/” A^^ / A\> nPi^r V >' c>"' V f' ^• S- I- 1 . a V 9.e'< ac'' To: Prom: Date: Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council C0UI\lCIL MEETING Ron Moorse, City Administrator DEC 1 4 1992 Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning j^Q December 10/ 1992 Subject: Flexibility Request - City Response At your November 23 meeting. Council did not indicate whether a formal response should be sent to the flexibility requests of Deephaven, Excelsior, Greenwood, Mound, and Shorewood. The DNR has not yet mailed out flexibility requests for Minnetonka or Victoria. r-?r.e 1 c-Please advise staff of any response you wish to regarding the five flexibility requests noted above. December 15 is the end of the 45 day review for this group. Isv Prom: Date: Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator November 16, 1992 Subject: Flexibility Requests - Deephaven, Excelsior, Greenwood, Mound, Shorewood We now have received formal DNR Flexibility Request Notices from the above noted cities. Only Requests from the Cities of Minnetonka and Victoria are yet to be received. The City of Orono has until December 14th to formally respond to this latest round of Flexibility Requests. Copies of the five Flexibility Requests are attached. Also attached is a copy of my October 8, 1992 memo, and a table indicating the types of flexibility requested by the various cities. Also attache.* are copies of the letters sent to the Cities of Woodland, Wayzata, Tonka Bay, Spring Park and Minnetonka Beach regarding their Flexibility Requests, and a letter to the DNR (all drafted by Councilmember Callahan). Staff Recommendation Please review the current five Flexibility Requests and direct staff as tc making an appropriate response. City DeephavcA Excelsior Lot Area Lot Width Resi­ dential Density Impervious Surface Coverage Structure Height Unsewered Lakeshore Setback Lockbox Allowance Lake Lot Road Setback Relax "RD* Lake Standards to "GD" I s B k; at s SB ta e e B B ts cs « cs B a a ■ a I raeBBBaaBBBSBaBBi ■SBaeBBBBaBaaBaBBeBaBBSBBi tBB X X X X X Greenwood Minnetonka (not rcvd) Minnetonka Beach Mlnnetrista X X X X Mound Orono X X X X X X Shorewood Spring Park X X X X Tonka Day Victoria (not rcvd) Hayzata Woodland X X X X X X To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Adnyj^^s^r^tor December 10, 1992 Op Lakeside Marina - Request for Action on 1992 License liOtii) List of Exhibits Exhibit A “ 1981 Landscape Plan Exhibit B - 1992 License Application Exhibit C - Draft License Attachment "Exhibit A" APPLICANT REQUESTS 1992 LICENSE APPROVAL Mr, Dunn has requested that the City take action to approve his 1992 license. He notes he had been under the impression that his license had been approved at the last Council meeting. However, the only action taken at that meeting was to adopt the denial resolution for Gayle's Marina. Staff was directed to continue working with Lakeside and North Shore Drive Marinas tc resolve their remaining license issues. EAST SIDE LANDSCAPING ISSUE REMAINS The remaining issue for Lakeside Marina is adherence to the landscape plan dating back to 1981, specifically the lack of plantings along the east lot line. This landscape plan which^is the most recent one on file, indicates existing trees, existing shrubs, and trees and shrubs proposed for planting in Spring 1981. The most recent license issued for this property was in 1983. In April 1983 the Marina Committee recommended approval of the 1983 license subject to letters from the Straley’s approving the dock plan, and "completion of 60' of plantings along the east property line by May 31, 1983". The license was actually granted in November 1983, but our files contain no clear documentation that the plantings were completed. However, the 1984 license review deafly notes that plantings along the west side, which were the result of much discussion between the City staff, marina, and nei^j "^ring property owners Ramberg and Schoeneman, certain.ly were in place and making progress. No discussion was documented ab>o;i.t plantings on the east sid*^ and this is either because those plantings were in place, or that that was not an issue of concern brought to the attention of staff by neighboring property owners as it was on the west side. During the t3«riod 1985-1991. the City paid relatively little attention to the marinas, but has spent considerable time reviewing them in the last year. Staff cannot document whether the proposed piantings shown on tne 1981 landscape plan ever existed to the extent shown on that plan, nor can applicant provide such documentation. Lakeside Marina-Request for Action on 1992 License December 10, 1992 Page 2 SEWER REROUTING IMPACT There is a likelihood that some plantings and shrubbery were removed during the recent rerouting of the muncipal sewer system immediately adjacent to Lakeside's east lot line. Public Works Department and City Engineer have confirmed that they have no photo documentation of what vegetation existed along Lakeside's east line prior to the project, but they have met with Mr. Dunn and all parties seem to agree that the City has replaced all plantings that Mr. Dunn requested be replaced. Photo documentation provided by Mr. Dunn suggests that some shrubs certainly did exist but does not provide a comprehensive inventory. DNR FUTURE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTY In light cf the potential for major changes in use of the adjacent DNR parcels, Mr. Dunn requests that the City remove this east side planting/screening issue as the final roadblock to his obtaining a 1992 license, and agree to work with him providing an appropriate planting/screening/buffer plan as planning for the DNR parcel progresses. Staff Recomaendation Given the lack of photo documentation as to the extent of past landscaping along the east side, given the fact that some of the screening that did exist: may have been removed and was not replaced as part of the sewer rerouting, and given that future uses of the adjacent property may result in the need for significant buffering and screening that was not addressed by the 1981-02 landscape plan, it may be appropriate for the City to conclude that timely adherence to the east side 1981 landscape plan is no longer a sufficient and valid reason for refusal of the license. If Council agrees, then a motion to direct statf to issue the 1992 license could be acted upon. A proposed license atta'-hment "Exhibit" with conditions of approval is attached. Isv i \0» ■\\H;R-4i2i 1 3T'/UJ/'J\!1.:>/% i •CITY OF OROi'lO 1 7.C2 (ykl 9 6'it llMf vJt Z*' i« Tm tmmm* A ¥%c )29.<4^ CtCv*TI(»* ! i* 1 * 1 • • 1 * * 1 * : 1 . 1 • • • • *, . '• ✓ \o !•! tmi^r JiM ? i"; ill lil r 7f ift€S4 r______V._____________ . i-rm (Si ii^r> Z.<a>M2h ierHcxi .4.;nr • -: -i-i •;•«;>: 110/ PM^ •i .1 -fyc# ^ S»4r «i^ AWTO P«U(Ui^ AvTO. • tffturuM^ TlXCS Xt^i>«ai7Ua i t^ai tPlUAdi^ - Docjk to’ A<.^.a<ux^ % ^3 u>u#^T axirsi ■'» PctAir ifr KAMuJi-€£Cr<r (1 ^JLtv^ f »f€WU4.»uw * 0-4.1 MJJtmt M«Aun T^ j 24.- IW MCVni OfC m »'%<Eitrry coomca. CITY OP ORONO License Year7/y^^ P.O. Box 66, Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Phone 473-7357 — Date application sent to Marina_ _ _ ___ _ _ Date application returned to City _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ANNUAL COMMERCIAL MAR^A LICENSE APPLICATIO^_ - Pursuant to Orcno Municipal Code Section 5.42 'APR 2 1932nlaw:section 5.42, Subdivision 2 - Licensed Require^..It._M unlawful for any person to engage or participate in ^he docking, mooring, or storing boats or (operating) a •-once, boat dock business" without first having obtained a license therefor from the City. PLEASE COMPLETE ALL ITEMS AND SUBMIT SI^ED APPLICATION, ATTACHMENTS, AND LICENSE APPLICATION FEE TO THE CITY CLERK BY JANUARY 15 OF THE LICENSE YEAR. BUSINESS INFORMATION 1. BUSINESS OR TRADE NAME Taj C .------- Street Address NiOCT-j ------------ Mailing Address t //^/\/. / / Maiina Phone ^ _____ 2. PROPERTY INFORMATION Date Property Acquired _ _ _ _ _ r Office Phone ■uii I w* 'jfiVHG FlhIME OFFICE 13'1300000 01 GE^i 344,i Marina Controls Property by:fee ovsrnership lease from other (explain) List every occupant, other than this Marina, occupying this property: Page 1 of 5 3, Names of abutting lakeshore property owners: (North/West)/I ^ ^ y<, (Name + Addressf (South/East)7A/.; b - //a- (Name + Address) Other Property Owners that may be affected by Marina's operati-.i: /V//3_ _ _ _ _^_ _ _ _ __ (Name + Address) (Attach sheet if necessary) 4. BUSINESS ORGANIZATION: (Check applicable item) individual ownership _ _ partnership corporation List the name of each partner or corporate officer and their title: List name(s) of the marina manager(s) responsible for daily operation: List the minimum number of employees on duty when the marina is open to tho public during the boating season: V repair or service personnel\ • dock attendants vX^ ethers available for sales/public information, etc. 9-/8 PRINCIPAL BUSINESS ACTIVITY (check services offered): ^_^^slip rental (moorage) parts and service _ _ buoy rental (moorage) fuel sales dry ,^^boa 6. BUSINESS SCHEDULE (check appropriate items): open all year open during boating season only List proposed hours of operation: dock access —X— AM to . retail sales S service V AM to ^ PM PM Page 2 of 5 7. M/vRINA SECURITY is provided by: ___ I y ^ c~t ) M. / ri DOCK INFORMATION’ NOTE; Th.e LMCD defined DOCK USE AREA must be shown on the dock plan submitted with this application. Maximum dock length equals 200 ft. from 929.4 shoreline. Minimum side setbacks from property line extension are: o-50 ft. from shore = 10 ft. minimum setback 50-100 ft. from shore * 15 ft. minimum setback 100-200 ft. from shoru * 20 ft. minimum setback 8. SHORELIN^fe)Tri: feet^ 9. WATER DEPTH: at shore Af / ft.; at 50 ft. out ft. at 100 ft. out ft.; at 200 ft. out — r 10. ACTUAL MAXIMUM DOCK LENGTH from shoreline; _-^00 ft. ft. 11 . DOCK CONSTRUCTION (permanent, s. ^onal, etc.) _____________________________ _____ permanent piling with seasonal decking f^7fU A ^^ _____ permanent piling and decking wooden piling metal or concrete piling metal decking ___^^^j^^ustomer __ wooden decking canopies are installed by:marina not allowed SLIPS AND BOAT UNI \ List the maximum number of boats in each category. Each slip, slide, lift, mooring or other space actually used for storage or keeping of “°^ts of watercraft must be indicated and numbered on the dock plan submitted with this application. company Service Rental Boats Rental Sllp/Space ToCIa Boats Boats 12 . Boats Stored in the Water a) At docK slips b) At docks, ot. er than slips c) At slides d) At lifts e) At moorings f) Other boats in water Total Boats in Water r5 to/If'A 122. iHo J-JJ Pace 3 of 5 13. Boats Dry-Stacked for Lake Use a) Inside Buildings b) Outside on Racks c) Outside - other means Total * Boats Dry-S tacked Coe«p«ny S«rvic« Boat* BffAtal ioBtf BcntaX Slip/Spac* TotBl Boacs 14. Total Watercraft Availability Units (Add 12 fi 13) L5. Other Boats on Premises a) Transient Boats (repair/service) b) New boats for sale (inventory) c) Used boats for sale (inventory) Total 16. Winter Storage on Premises a) Transient boats (repair/service) b) Contract storage(customer's boats) c) Inventory (new & used boats) Total Inside Building Outside Storage Insi<^^Building Storage 7 f OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS 17. Summer Parking a) Retail sales/service customers 8 spaces minimum (-fl per each 800s.f. over 1,000 s.£.) b) Boating customers 6 spaces per 10 Availability Units (.6 X __(line 14)) ^ c) Launching ramp customers I'O spaces minimum per ramp = cars cars cars Total Spaces 18. Winter Parking Minimum 2 spaces, or retail spaces per line 16a above \car:; LAI4DSCAPING AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS Ordinances require establishment and maintenance of minimum green areas and natural screening along all Marina property lines: 10 ft. front yard, 10 ft. side yard and a lakeshore yard of 10% of the lot depth, not less than 10 ft. and not more than 75 ft. 19. Describe in detail the plantings (trees, shrubs, grassvines, flowers, etc.) and other improvements proposed to be installed this coming license year: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ • ./ D arfo d C ATTACHMENTS The following must accompany this application: 1. 2. A CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY (Per LMCD requirements) indicating the boundaries of the marina property and the authorized dock use area, the location of all structures, storage all existing facilities, all changes from the previous season, and any changes propo^d for the duration of the current application. A A DETAILED LANDSCAPE PLANor all setback ar existing and proposed location and sizes of shrubbery, grass areas and other foliage or landscaping features. 3. 4. A copy of your LMCD LICENSE APPLICATION. A COMMERCIAL MARINA LICENSE APPLICATION PEE according to the current City fee schedule. Initial Application § $300.00 Renewal Application § $200.00 ^"2^ . Each Boat Unit (Line 12) $ $2.00/ea Each Boat Unit (Line 13) # $1.00/ea TOTAL DUE THIS APPLICATION 5.LATE FEES - Renewals - Applications for renewal of licenses shall be made no later than January 15 of the new license year. The City shall not accept renewal license applications received after January 15 unless the application is accompanied by a late fee of ~T50.00._ Q rf\ REVIEW PROCEDURE When a complete application is received, this information will be referred to the Marina Committee for review. The City Council will review the Marina Committee recoi^endation ^d will thereafter pass upon the application. THE MARINA MAY OPEN FO^R PUBLIC USE ONLY UPON APPROVAL OF THE LICENSE BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code, the applicant hereby requests the Orono City Council to review this Marina License application, and agrees and authorizes the City of .*1n: p Signed ,^^)spe<itioi -t- /'t Date ^ -(V / CITY OP OROHO EXHIBIT A LICENSE NO. CONDITIONS OF ISSUANCE FOR ANNUAL COMMERCIAL DOCK LICENSE I. LICENSEE Address Lakeside Marina 3324 North Shore Drive# Wayzata# MN License Period • January 1, 1992 to December 31, 3V92 II. BOAT DENSITY The number of in-place boat slips, lifts and buoys shall not exceed the number shown on the attached plan, Exhibit B, and in accordance with Resolution 938, in no case shall the number of authorized boat slips, lifts, buoys, or dry stack slips exceed the number permitted in the prior year's license. Authorized Summer Density per attached plant Bay _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Maxwell Transient Slips Rental Slips Company Slips Sub-Total: Slips at Dock Offshore Buoys Maximum Boats in Water Dry stacked slip for use in lake Maximum Boats in water per prior license _0_ 77 * Other Boats (for sale/service, etc.) (per prior license) 2297 MAXIMUM BOAT DENSITY ON LAND AND/OR IN WATER *«* Exceeding this maximiun boat density, or exceeding the number of permitted slips, lifts or buoys is a violation of this license subject to revocation and/or prosecution for violation of Section 10.41 of the Orono Municipal Code. Authorized Number of Winter Stored Boats (per prior license) Exhibit A License No. Page 2 III. DOCK LAYOUT (reference Exhibits B 6 C attached) Maximum authorized length of main dock 200 feet (see item VI-IC). Docks extending beyond 200 feet and docks encroaching into required side yard setbacks are hereby specifically declared to be illegal non- conforming structures which are not permitted under this license except as noted below. This application does not contain such illegal structures. All such violations are subject to prosecution under Sections 5.42 and 10.41 of the Orono Municipal Code. IV. Marina is authorized for FUEL SALES subject to compliance with the State Fire Code. V. Kequired number of OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES 68 VI. All such spaces must be maintained available on the property during all summer season hours of operation. SPECIAL CONDITIONS required for compliance with the ordinances of the City and/or the LMCD. The issuance of this license is subject to full compliance with these conditions. Failure to comply with these conditions is cause for license revocation and/or prosecution by the City. 1. Council acknowledges the following side setback and length variances to LMCD dock regulations allowing the current dock layout per attached Exhibit B designating 77 slips on Maxwell Bay: A. East endf south dock; required 15*» allowed 10*. B. East end, north dock; required 20*, allowed 15*. C. Fuel dock extends 25' past 200' limit for safety. 2. Council will continue to deny any future extension of Lakeside Marina's commercial use of residential zoned property on Crystal Bay based on the following findings: A. There is adequate area and lake access provided on the Marina's lakeshore commercial property on Maxwell Bay. B. The proposed commercial use in a residential area adversely affects the value and use of surrounding properties. C. The use of a dock across the road from the commercial operation causes traffic and pedestrian problems. D. Such use would be adverse to the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code. Exhibit A License No. Page 3 3.Council will hold in abeyance further action to required adherence to the 1981 approved landscape plan for the east side of the property subject to resolution of the future use of the adjacent DNR property and on the condition that applicant and the C.ancil reach a timely agreement on a revised comprehensive landscape plan to be developed by the applicant with Council/staff input. Vll. Nothing in this license shall confer upon any person for the benefit of any property any vested right to use Lake Minnetonka or the premises in a manner permitted by this resolution, but the use of Lake Minnetonka and the premises shall remain subject to such regulations and ordinances as the City and other competent regulatory authorities shall deem necessary from time to time in the public interest. /J >} d ^ I Bonestroo Rosene Anderllk& |\|| Associates Engineers & Architects November 24, 1992 Otto G B(X'e«TO P£ Hooeft W ftojene PE • C An<3e^» t PE Vjr. r L Soaji^ PE 5 :''irc3 E Turner P£ G-enn ff Coc« PE •r^^njs E NcyPV P£ G PE Susan M Eceft«n CPA •Ser^'Cr CorsLi<fant Hewvarfl a SanfCffl PE Ke<h A Codon. PE Pc^frT P Pip^re PE U Pcsrer pg DawO O Lo\M>ta PE Pcoen C Pusse« A» a ;er»\ A BOorOOO P£ ^^anl A Hansen PE M<nae* T Pautmann PE Ted < P’fid PE Thomas R Anderson A f A Donna C BurgarCt. PE Thomas E Angul PE Umae« Maaioe/ PE V<hae» P Rau PE Agnes M RrtTg A iC P Thomas W ^Ptf'SOn PE \ichae' c l>ncn PE James R Va'arvj PE Jerry D Peozsch PE PCenneth P Andenon PE Varii R RtsTs PE Va/*t A Seio PE U es B Jensen P£ L Phjfo Grave* w PE Karen L W<emen PE Gar/ D KOMofiil PE f Tooo toiler PE Kern R ''aoa PE Shawn O GostaTson PE Cec -o O'.ver PE Cnarses A E'CKson 19 Gar>’ W Moren P£ Leo M PawefSky ^:;13atK)iaLJiEeilNG Philip j Caswell PE Mark o svanniffEC 1 4 1992 emroFORONo City of Orono Box 66 Ciystal Bay. MN 55323 Attention: Mr. John Gerbardson Rc: McCulley Road MSAP #152-104-03 Our File No. 13957 Dl( irn) !l NOV 3 0 i09S Dear John: Enclosed are three (3) signed copies of the 2nd and final request for payment for the above referenced project. The project underran the original contract amount by $2,485.77 or 8.1%. The principle reason for the underrun is minor variations in actual constructed quantities as compared to estimated quantities. Also enclosed are Minnesota Department of Revenue IC-134 forms and a lien waiver from Apple Valley Ready-mix Company. This work has been satisfactorily completed and we recommend the City Council accept the project and make final payment. If you have any questions please contact me at this office. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, 4^0SENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. ' Harlan M. Obon HMO:lk Enclosures 2335 M%tt Hlghw^ 36 • St. Paul, MInnasoM 55113 • 612-636^«600 l/U iOfWf ffO« S-M MDStfW Owner City of OroDO, Box 66, 1335 Brown Rd S, Ciystal Bay, MN 55232 Date Sept. 22, 1992 frC AndtfMi A |\J| AMOdAttS For Period October 31, 1991 to September 22, 1992 Request No. 2 A l*inal Contractor Bituminous Consulting & Contracting, 2456 Main St NE, Mpis, MN 55434 - ' ♦ * ♦ V RliOUIZST IX)R l»AYMIiN*r McCullcy Road MSA Street Improvements MSA Project No. 152-104-03 l-ilc No. 13957 SUMMARY Recoounended for Approval by: liONE2riR(^^OSl£Nli, AWERUK & ASSOClA'l1-ii. INC Approved by Cuntnictor: BniiMlNOUS mNSUL'llNG A. CX3NTRAC11NG Approved by Owner: CTIY OI‘ ORONO, MN Specilied Contract Completion Date: October 10, 1991 Dale: t39S7.KFP 1 Original Contract Amount $30,569.75 2 Change Order • Addition $ 3 Change Order • Deduction $ 4 Revised Contract Amount $30469.75 5 Value Completed to Date $28,083.98 6 Material on 1 land S 0.G0 7 Amount Earned S 28,083.98 8 Less Retainagc s 0.00 9 Sub-Total $28,083.98 10 Less Amount Paid Previously s 23,736.52 11 AMOUNT DUE nilS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO.2 & Final $4,347.46 iI ^ • lloa Uak Cua tract OiUAlily LI ait IVioe Quantity To Dale Amoual lb Dale 2104.513 Saw biluuiiaous 2I0S.526 Seieci granular borrow 2112.501 Subgrade preparation 2232.501 Mill biluiuinous surface 2331.508 Type 41 wearing course mixture 2331.518 Bit. material for mixture 2357.502 Bit. material for tack coat 2503.511 12” RC pipe sewer. CL 5 2503.573 12* RC pipe apron w/trasb guard 2506.509 Const CB w/R3067V cstg. 2511.501 Random riprap. Class II 2531.501 Concrete curb dt gutter, Des. D424 2554.501 Remove & replace traffic barrier 2573.502 Siltatiou/erosion control fence b*' 'fi ”Eiivirofcncc” 2575.505 Sodding, erosion type Total Work Completed to Date LF CY SY SY IN TN OL LF EA EA CY U- LF LF SY 1,000 100 1,000 25 325 20 150 193 •> n 8 1,000 100 150 1,000 0.60 10.00 1.75 5.00 18.15 120.00 1.00 22.00 500.00 950.00 75.00 7.20 4.00 3.00 2.85 1,000 25 889 21.3 348.82 19.19 60 193 -»mm 2 8 998 600.00 250.00 1,555.75 106.50 6J3I.08 2J02.8U 60.00 4.246.00 1,000.00 1.900.00 600.00 7,185.60 150 525 450.00 I 106 $28,083.98 I3957.RFP RF-1 PROJECT PAYMENT yiATUS Owner Project Piroject No. Ffle No. Contractor City of Orono McCullcy Road MSA Street Improvements MSA1» 152-104-03 13957 Bituminous Consulting & Contracting CIIANCiE ORDERS No. Date I Amount Total Change Orders - Add PAYMENT SUMMARY No.Period 4 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Start 10-31-92 10-31-91 9-22-92 Payment $23,736.52 4,347.46 Retain^e $1,249.29 0.00 Completed $24,985.81 28,038.98 Total Payment to Dale Retainage, Payment No. Total Value Completed 2 & I'inul $28,083.98 0.00 $28,083.98 Original Contract Change Orders Revi.sed Contract $30,569.75 0.00 $.30,509.75 t3957.RIT RP-2 i Bonestroo Rostne AnderUkA Associates OROO Bermmaa M naom w Mnt. iOMpn C Anovm. n. M#rvm L iU*W I TUmff ^1 Oitrn R Cocm. rt morrtM I NO)ff& Ff 0. iuiMfi M C FA ComuR»ni Cngintcri A Archltccti December 8, 1992 A ft PIflih A. Oowv Ff. F| ffOim ^ Foeitr. Ff 0^9 O lAim Ft %>Bf 1 C tviMA A < A jry A l9^«gr«. Ff Vfrt A Ntmort. Ft r fiitminn Ft >|C F)f4. FI Tnomii i. AnotnOi>. A.i A PAFf^ C 94F9i<l9i M T«iOA*il I Ai^i FI lFf*M4 VtAFVf. Ff F UiA Ff AQnttM. RTf AlCF Tnorrti W Hmnon H C grxh. Ff iilFM R MfIBAf Ft if»7 D Ft Mrr^ F. Ancmon. Ff. Mjt RR ffe.. Ff Mjnt A lt«^ Ff Cfy Mon##'. Fi DtruK 1 fflf#Ron. Ff Of»yiR. RFKFrvfffV Ff. i Ff More O VMAt Ff MM a JfAltA Ff t. FfWip OfMf IFL Ft Rinn L wmtmfu Ff. 0#ry d triMBntt. Ff F 1MFN(r.F| Rftf* R tipfiFf a auiuflor^. Ff Ctcito Oivir. FJ. CFIM A fncilOA L poM FjMtdfy H#r*tn M OUOA F InftriRR City of OroDo Box 66 Ciystal Bay. MN 55323 Attn: Mr. John Gerhardson CiTyot^ °ffONo Re: FUe No. 13937 Stubbs Bay Sanitery Sewer Improvements Dear John, Enclosed please find Change Order No. 2 that provides for additional items necessaiy to complete construction of the Stubbs Bay Sanitary Sewer project. This chan^ order would increase the contract change order amount to $43»991.50. The contingency included in the project was $50,400 to cover anticipat^i construction change orders. The lift station change approved in Chimge Order No. 1 and 'he service jackings were anticipated when the prefect costs were developed. The granular backfill and striping was not anticipated but is within the contingency amount The service jackings were required to eliminate open cut crossings of Co. Rd. 84. This is a requirement of Hennepin County becauM of the potential for service trench settlement The item wu omitted when ta king off quantities for the proposal. The granular material was required to stabilize the subgrade wb^tre poor soils were encountered on County Road 84, West imhm Street and East Lake Street. Hennepin County originally requested two feet of granular fill but we were able to stabilize the roadway with one foot The subgrade on these street segments could not be stabilized without adding the granular material and sttbilization fabric. The striping was a requirement of Hennepin County in areas where the pavement was removed on Co. Rd. 84. The project is 80 percent complete and we are not awere of any other items that could increase the cost The work items remaining to be completed are generaUy predictable. Please contact this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:li End.l3937.cor 2I1S WUst Highway 26 • $t. Fmii, awnnesota Will • 612^26-4400 L f City of Orono, PO Box 66, Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Dale November 5, 1992 Cootractor Progressive Contractors, Inc, 8736 21achaiy Lane, Osseo, MN 55369 Change Order No. 2 Bond Co. 7284360 Cobb Slrecker Dunphy, John Martinsco, 150 S 5tb St, #2000, Mpls, MN 55402 aiANGE ORDER NO. 2 Stubbs Bay Sanitary Sewer Improvements File No. 13937 UatakSsoLslSlsA For the Hennepin County permit requirements, one (1) foot of granular borrow was required as part of the street section. The County also required that temporary striping be placed on the roadway. Granular borrow was also placed on West Lake Street and East Lake Street to stabilize tbe soft subgrade prior to building the roadway. Jacking of CSAH #84 for the sewer service was due to county requirements. The following items are to be added to the contract. 1 2 3 Umi Change Order No. 2 Jack 4* senrices under CSAH #84 Granular borrow 4* Striping, while paint Total Change Order No. 2 Uatt LF CY LF 250 2,000 6,758 Uak Plrice 65.00 8.50 0.20 Tout 16,250.00 17,000.00 U51.60 $34,601.60 Original Contract Amount Previous Change Orders This Change Order No. 2 - ADD Revised Contract Amount (including this Change Order)$ 1.480331.95 9390.00 34,60130 1324323.45 13«37.CHA CO-1 RcoommcDded for Approval by: LOO.JIOSENE. ANDERUK A A [HATES, INC Approved by Contracton PROGRESSIVE CONTRACTORS; INC Approved by Owner: CITY CP ORONO, MN Date: PillrfrytiffQ 1 ♦ Owner 1 • Contractor 1 • Engineer 1 • Bond Co. 1M97.CHA ca2 n-'il .I- ii j J K ■ c TO; FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator December 11, 1992 COVillCIlMEiTING DPC 1 4 t992 CITY OF ORONO SUBJECT: Old Crystal Bay Road Bike/Hike Trail Based on direction from the Council the Park Commission Chair has moved ahead with negotiations with Hennepin Parks regarding the sharing of costs of the Old Crystal Bay Road Bike Trail. The negotiations resulted in an agreement to share the costs equally. The total costs to be paid by each are $268,000. Orono's share is to be paid through a combination of Municipal State Aid funds and park dedication fees. Chairman Flint will present a report at the Council meeting. 12992.5 TO: FROM DATE Ron Moorse, City Administrator Tom Kuehn, Finance Director December 9, 1992 snBJBCT: Authorization to Disburse City Funds for Claims Received ISSUE - Authority to disburse City funds in payment of claims received between the December 14th Council meeting and the December 28th cancelled Council meeting. DISCUSSION - This month we have only one Council meeting^ scheduled for Monday, December 14th. The second Council meeting would normally be held on Monday, December 28th, but has been cancelled in line with previous years practices. We will have the next scheduled Council meeting on Monday, January 11, 1993. We therefore are requesting authorization to do a normal check writing for the cancelled Council meeting. This practice has been done in December each year with the Council then formally approving the claims at the first meeting in January of the following year. TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by _, to authorize the City Treasurer to disbuse”City funds in payment of claims received for the December 28th Council meeting, which has been cancelled and that suc'"i paid claims are to be presented at the January 11, 1993 regular Council meeting for formal approval. 7 COUNCIL MEETING TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator December 9, 1992 DEC 1 4 1992 CITYOFORONO SUBJECT: 1992 Interfund Transfers and Loan Payments Attachment; A. Finance Director’s Memo Dated 12/9/92 ISSUE Approval of end of the year transfers between funds. INTRODUCTION At the end of e transfer monies categories; h year the Council is requested to formally •■.':ieen funds. These transfers fall into two a.) Budgeted Transfers - Items designated in that years budget when originally adopted. These require formal fund transfer to implement. b,; Fund Obligations - Loans and payments from one fund t:’: another to reimburse expenses incurred by one fund on behalf of another. This is generally for City portions of special assessments. RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval of transfers indicated on the attached memo. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by that the interfund operating transfers, loan payments and special assessment payments on City property be approved as presented, effective D’acember. 31, 1992. Ayes , Nays ... . TO:Ron Moorse FROM:Tom Kuehn, DATE:December 9 ^O^ECT: 1992 Interfund Transfers and Loan Payments At the end of each year it is necessary to transfer monies between certain funds for the purpose of providing support as budgeted or for repayment of outstanding loans, as scheduled. The necessary transactions for 1992 are listed below. FUNDS FROM AMOUNT General Imp & Equip Outlay $62,800.00 Water Operating Sewer Operating $ 2,666.00 General 1985 Imp Bond Debt Service $ 5,630.00 PURPOSE Annual operating transfer for capital equipment, new and replacement as budgeted. Loan payment (princ $2,443, int $233) for water tower refurbishing - payment #11 of 11 - balance o/s 12/31/92 $-0-. Budgeted payment, 7th installment of 15 for special assessments for sanitary sewer on City owned property in Crystal Bay (princ $3,080, int $2,550). Balance o/s 12/31/92 $24,615. Transfer of 1992 special assessments collected to repay monies borrowed for Co. Rd. 15 street light project. Balance o/s 12/31/92 $37,575.73. Payment 3 of 5 for City share of costs of Woodhill Ave, street improvement project (princ $1,494, int $359). Balance o/s 12/31/92 $2,990. It is requested that the foregoing transfer, loan and special assessment payments be approved effective December 31, 1992. Permanent Improve Revolving (P.I.R.) General $19,324.60 General P.I.R.$ 1,853.00 121092.5 TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator December 10, 1992 SUBJECT: Appoint Insurance Agent of Record for 1993 Attachment: Agent of Record Agreement The agent of record agreement with Mr, Duweyn Carlson of the Apple Valley Insurance Agency renews annually on January 1. The service fee for 1993 is $7,250, an increase of $250 or 3.6% from 1992 and is included in the 1993 insurance budget. The agent fee is stated at a gross amount and is reduced by commissions earned through the policy premiums paid by the City. For example the fee for service in 1992 was $7,000.00, however the net direct cost to the city after applying commissions earned was $2,1"3.75. Requested Action: Council appointment of Mr. Duweyn Carlson, Apple Valley Agency, as insurance agent of record for 1993. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by to appoint Mr._, seconded by _, Duweyn Carlson, Apple Valley Agency, as Insurance Agent of Record for 1993, at a fee not to exceed $7,250, including commissions earned on policy premiums paid by the City. Ayes , Nays CITY 01’ ORONO AGENT OF RECORD AGREEMENT Duwoyn P. Csrlson of tho Apple Valley Agency agrees to perform the following services for the City of Orono; The negotiation and placement of all the reguired insurance ; 2* Information on relevant changes in insurance marketSf products and services; 3. Assistance in developing comprehensive insurance coverages; 4. Provide an insurance policy inventory and summary; 5» A complete accounting of commissions earned (direct only) on the account; 6. A cumulative five-year premium and loss record; 7. Prepare an allocation of premium by department as required by the City; 8. Loss exposure list and classification; up-dated annually; 9. Assist with all claims and losses; 10. Assistance in minimizing premiums; reviewing and auditing rating basis, formulas, etc. 11. Assistance in loss prevention engineering and loss control ; 12. Willingness to keep an in-agency record of losses including reserves established; 13. Assist the City in Risk Management program. The fee for service for the Insurance Policy year 1 993 will be $7,250.00 and will cover the following: 1. Conduct an Exposure survey and prepare specifications 2. Obtain quotes 3. Review policies, billings and claims The City agrees to pay $1,000.00 upon delivery of the policies, and the balance of $6,250.00, less commissions received, upon documented presentation. This agreement is valid for the calendar year 1993. APPLE VALLEY AGENCY Date Duweyn Carlson CITY OF ORONO Date Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Date 121092.4 Ronald Moorse, City Administrator 121092.6 TO; FROM: DATE: Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator A COUNCIL MEEHNG DEC 1 4 1992 CiTYOFORONO December 10, 1992 SUBJECT; 1993 Excess Liability Insurance - Resolution ATTACHMENTS: 1. LMCIT Excess Liability Coverage Election Form 2. Resolution The City has general liability coverage under the basic League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) in the statutory limit amount of $600,000 and carries an additional amount of $2,000,000 in excess liability coverage for those claims which are greater than the basic coverage limits. The City must elect to waive or not waive the liability limits established by Minnesota statutes. The election to waive or not waive the statutory limits must be made prior to the effective date of coverage, January 1st each year. If the City elects not to waive the statutory limits the excess coverage would be available only for those claims which are not covered by the statutory limits. If the City elects to waive the statutory limits the excess coverage would be available for all claims including claims covered by the statutory liability limits. The City has elected to waive the statutory limits because of exposure to some kinds of liability to which the statutory limits either don't or might not apply. Some possible examples are: * liability under the federal civil rights acts * liability that the city has assumed contractually liability for actions (of officials or employees) in another state liability for a zoning action action by the court to negate, void or circumvent the statutory limit Requested Action -> Council adopting of Resolution to waive the statutory limits on tort liability under M.S. 466.04, to the extent of the excess liability coverage limits. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _ , to adopt Resolution #__ Waiving the Limit on Tort LiabTlity Under Minnesota Statutes 466.04. Ayes , Nays LMCrr EXCESS LIABILITY COVERAGE Cities obtaining excess coverage from the League of Minnesota Cities * '' * Insurance Trust must decide whether or not to waive the statutory liability limits to the extent of the excess coverage purchased. This decision must be made by the city counciL CITIES PURCHASING EXCESS COVERAGE MUST COMPLETE AND RETURN THIS FORM TO LMCIT BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE COVERAGE. For further information^ refer to the accompan3dng memo. City officials may also want to discuss these issues with the city attorney. The City of accepts excess liab;l>ry coverage limits of $from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust Check one: The city DOES NOT WAIVE the monetary limits on tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04. OR. The city WAIVES the monetary limits on tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04, to the extent of the limits of the excess liability coverage obtained fr'om the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. Date of city council meeting:. Signature:, Position: Return this completed form to Berkley Risk Services, Inc., 920 Second Avenue South, Suite 700, Minneapolis, MN 55402-4023. 04/92 RESOLUTION TQ WAIVE THE MONETARY LIMITS ON TORT LIABILITY ESTABLISHED BY MINNESOTA STATUTES 466.04 466.04, to the extent of the limits of the excess liability coverage obtained from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. Py the City Council of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held December X4f X992« 121092.1 COUi TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator December 8, 1992 t/i *«» ‘7,*? SUBJECT: Appoint Auditor for Fiscal Year 1992 We have requested cost estimates from the audit firm of Malloy, Karnowski, Radosevich & Company for performing the 1992 fiscal year audits. They have submitted a total estimate of $15,400, excluding direct expenses and excluding any additional expenses incurred as a result of application to the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. This compares with an actual cost for the 1991 audits v,f $15,415 plus $644 for direct expenses and $3,000 for the certificate program. The 1992 FY cost estimates are: Audit Cost a. b. c. Annual audit for the City $13,600 Single audit covering federal programs 800 Minnesota legal compliance audit 1,000 TOT a:.^15,400 Certificate of Achievement Cost not to exceed $ 3,000 In 1992 the budget for the 1991 audits was $14,800, plus $3,800 for the Certificate of Achievement and direct costs. The 1993 budget is $16,070 for the 1992 audits, plus $3,914 for the Certificate and direct costs. Requested Action - Council approval of the appointment of the audit firm of Malloy, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., C.P.A.'s to perform the required audits of the 1992 fiscal year records. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by to appoint the audit firm of Malloy, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co. to perform the required audits for the 1992 fiscal year at an estimated cost of $15,400 plus direct expenses and to assist with the Certificate of Achievement Financial Reporting Program at a cost not to exceed $3,000. Ayes , Nays 121092.2 z' TO: PROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator December 10, 1992 COUNCIL MEERNG DEC 1 4 1992 CnVOFORONO SUBJECT: 1993 Application for Coverage Under the LMCIT Pelf- Insured Workers' Compensation Plan Attachment: 1.) Application For Coverage Form 2.) Estimated 1993 Premium Quotation We have received the renewal premium quotation for worker compensation insurance from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) for the year 1993. The gross premium quote for 1993 is $73,190, which is reduced by our favorable experience modification of .69 and a premium discount of 6%, resulting in a net initial premium of $46,178. This compares with our net initial premium for 1992 of $46,872 and for 1991 of $58,776. The worker compensation insurance budget for 1993 is $61,486, therefore the ret initial premium is $14,614 under budget. Requested Action - Council approval of application for coverage and award of worker compensation to LMCIT for 1993. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by to approve the 1993 Application for Coverage under the LMCIT Self-Insured Workers' Compensation Plan and award the 1993 worker compensation insurance to the LMCIT for the initial net premium of $46,178, effective January 1, 1993. Ayes , Nays League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust Group Self-Insured Workers' Compensation Plan Administrator Berkley Administrators lonrwfy eba a member of ih€ Berkley Risk Management Services Group RO. Box 59143 Minneapolis. MN 55459-0143 Phone (612) 544-0311 Self-Insured Workers* Compensation Quotation (RENEWAL of Aareement No. 02-000362-7) Name of City: oromo Agreement Period: From:01/01/19«53 To: 01/01/199 m Estimated Annual Premium: CODE RATE ESTIMATED PAYROLL DEPOSIT PREMIUM STREET CONSTRUCTION t MAINTENANCE 5506 7.47 151180. 11293. WATERWORKS 7520 14.77 49490.2361 . SEWAGE DISPOSAL PLANT 7580 7.32 7m230.5434. POLICE 7720 6.54 655540.<42872. CLERICAL 9810 0.5<^261280.1411. ANIMAL CONTROL 8831 2.59 9690.251. CLUB-COUNTRY/GOLP 9060 3.25 43450.1575. PARKS 9102 4.17 15600.651. MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES 9A10 2.31 299660.6922. ELECTED OR APPOINTED OFFICIALS 9<4ll 2.31 13200.420. Menus 1 Freotuim Evoenence Modification 0.69 Standard Premium Premium Discount Discounted Standard Premium 73190. 50501. 4323. 46178. LMC Insurance Trust Discount 0*/,0. Deposit Premium 46178. The foregoing quotation is tor a deposit premium based on your estimate of payroll. Your final actual premium will be computed after an audit of payroll subsequent to the close of your agreement year and will be subject to revisions in rate or experience modification. While you are a member of the LMCIT Workers ’ Compensation Plan, you will be eligible to participate in distributions from the Trust based upon claims experience and earnings of the Trust. Berkley Administrators BA441CC (5/91) TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator December 9, 1992 12992.6 SUBJECT: 1993 Nonunion Employee Salary Resolution I 1 4 IVq "■Cflni\IO ATTACHMENTS 1. 2. 3. 4. Memo Concerning 1993 Wage and Insurance Adjustments 1993 Compensation Resolution Compensation Plan Step Eligibility for 1993 Compensation Schedule for 1993 At the November 23, 1992 Council meeting the City Council approved the wage and insurance adjustments for 1993 as presented in Attachment No. 1. The 1 993 Compens ion Resolution and the 1993 Compensation Schedule reflect that decision. Attachment No, 3 indicates those positions eligible for step increases during the year. R«.>quested Action: Council adoption of the 1 993 Nonunion Co.Toensation Resolution, Compensation Schedule and Step E’igibility. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by__, seconded by___, to adopt Resolution No. __, Establishing Salaries for City Employees for 1993. Ayes , Nays TO; FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator November 19, 1992 SUBJECT: 1993 Wage and Insurance Adjustments CountiT tecommended the also recommended that the ma'’x imu”ci ty*/ontt 160^0" for h'ea 1 th fSllowTng^ctiieriar^® insurance adjustments are based on the A. Wage Adjustment Criteria 1* Cost of living increase a. ) US consumer price index: annualized increase from October '91 to October *92 is 3.1%. b. ) Minneapolis/St. Paul consumer price index: annualized increase from the first half of 1991 to the first half of 1992 (July '91 to July *92) is 3.1%. y CO 2. Market comparison a.) A survey of comparable cities indicates increases for 1993 in the range of 2.5%-3.0%. B. Insurance Contribution Adjustment Criteria 1. 1993 insurance premium increases (familv coverage) ^ Plan 1992 Premium 1993 Premium Dollar Difference Percent Difference Group Health $356.76 $397.48 $40.72 11.4% PHP/Medica $399.50 $430.92 $31.42 7.9% Med Centers $389.35 $437.25 $47.90 12.3% A) The average premium increase is $40.01 per month. B) 50% of the average increase amount is $20.00 per month. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The initial budget estimate for general salary increases was 3%. Tne insurance contribution increase was estimated at $20.00 per month. The city's policy concerning annual insurance contribution adjustments has been to split the average increase on a 50/50 basis. This policy has enabled the city to respond to the large premium increases while continuing to control expenditure increases. Based on the criteria identified above, the recommendation regarding 1993 wage and insurance increases is as follows: A. Wages: 2.75% increase B. Insurance: $20.00 per month increase ($271.00 per month) The combined affect of the wage and insurance increase is to increase total wage and insurance expenditures by 3.2%. A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SALARIES FOR CITY EMPLOYEES FOR 1993 BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota that initial salaries and wages for City employees be established as follows, effective January 1, 1993: NAME Ron Moorse Dorothy Hallin Stephen Sullivan John Gerhardson Jack Brinkhaus Thomas Kuehn Jeanne Mabusth Michael Gaffron Lyle Oman Ronald Steffenhagen Stephen Vfeckman Linda Vee Carole Haseman Sue Bobzine Wayne Quast Steve Hansen Dale Skreen James Gregory Barry Rathbun Randy O'Brien Scott Oberaiqner Gregory Palmer Charlotte Knutson Linda Walters Bruce Vang Carol Hansing Jamie Bosma Ricky Karnitz Scott Boris John Schoenhoff David Goman David Nelson Janice Kennen POSITION City Administrator City Clerk Police Chief Public Works Director Public Works Supr. II Treas/Finance Director Zoning Administrator Asst. Zoning Administrator Building Official Golf Course Supervisor On Site Septic Manager Deputy City Clerk/Admin Sec. Secretary/Recorder Police Secretary Public Works Supr. I Public Works Maintenance Public Works Maintenance Public Works Maintenance Public Works Maintenance Public Works Maintenance Public Works Maintenance Public Works Maintenance Depty Treas/Sr. Acct. Clerk Asst. Finance Director Field Inspector Asst. Police Secretary P.T. Copy & File Clerk I P.T. Police Officer, P.T. Police Officer, P.T. Police Officer, P.T. Community Service Officer P.T. Community Service Officer P.T. Clerk, Police P.T. 1992 SALARY $58,498.00 32.117.00 52.106.00 49.027.00 40.783.00 54.850.00 46.692.00 37.284.00 37.284.00 32.117.00 28.288.00 11.726/Hr 11.109/Hr 12.344/Hr 16.622/Hr 13.045/Hr 13.045/Hr 14.530/Hr 13.179/Hr 13.179/Hr 12.520/Hr 12.520/Hr 12.344/Hr 14.316/Hr 15.441/Hr 10.492/Hr 9.836/Hr 10.343/Hr 10.300/Hr 10.300/Hr 5.463/Hr 6.436/Hr 7.044/Hr 1993 SALARY $60,108.00 33.001.00 53.539.00 50.374.00 41.904.00 56.358.00 47.975.00 38.309.00 38.309.00 33.001.00 29.066.00 12.049/Hr 11.415/Ht 12.683/Hr 17.079/Hr 13.541/Hr 13.541/Hr 14.530/Hr 13.541/Hr 13.541/Hr 12.864/Hr 12.864/Hr 12.683/Hr 14.710/Hr 15.866/Hr 10.781/Hr 10.106/Hr 10.627/Hr 10.627/Hr 10.627/Hr 5.613/Hr 6.613/Hr 7.238/Hr BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that mileage for City use of private cars on City business be reimbursed at $.28 per mile. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 14, 1992. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 12992.2(99) Barbara A.Peterson, Mayor 12992.4(99) 1993 COHPENSATION PLAN STEP ELIGIBILITY Position Compensation Current Level Step Persons Employed/Promoted Since Plan in Effect City Administrator On-Site Septic Manager Deputy City Clerk/ Admin. Sec. Secretary/Recorder Public Works Maint. Public Works Maint. Police Chief 6 4 4 5 5 12 3 3 2 3 3 3 Eligible Step 4 4 3 4 4 4 Review Date 9/01/93 7/13/93 4/23/93 9/09/93 5/21/93 10/22/93 8/19/93 I : 1 I) . L GROUPING 1 2 3 4 5 6 12992.3(99) CITY OF ORONO COMPENSATION PLAN APPENDIX B POINT GROUPINGS POINT RANGE 44 - 47 48 - 51 52 - 55 56 - 59 60 65 64 68 69 - 73 MID POINT POSITIONS IN GROUPING 45.5 49.5 53.5 57.5 62 66.5 CSO Laborer Clerical I Clerical II Police Secretary Sr. Accounting Cleric Deputy Clerk/Secretary Recorder Public Works Maintenance Patrol Officer On-Site Septic Manager (E) Asst. Finance Director City Clerk (E) Golf Course Supervisor (E) Building Inspector 8 74 - 78 76 Public Works Supervisor I 9 79 - 83 81 Asst. Zoning Administrator Building Official (E) (E) 10 84 - 88 86 Lieutenant (E) Public Works Supervisor II (E) 11 89 - 100 95 Building/Zoning Admin. (E) Public Works Director (E) 12 101 - 110 105 Police Chief (E) Finance Director (E) 13 111 - 124 117.5 City Administrator (E) (E) - Exempt CITY OF ORONO COMPENSATION PLAN EXPECTED PERFORMANCE LEVELS 1993 LEVEL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 STEP I $9,019 $9,545 $10,158 $10,781 $11,510 $12,503 $13,486 $14,517 $15,655 $17,124 $19,606 $23,031 $27,292 STEP II $9,550 $10,107 $10,756 $11,415 $12,187 $13,239 $14,279 $15,371 $16,576 $18,132 $20,759 $24,386 $28,898 STEP III $10,080 $10,668 $11,353 $12,049 $12,864 $13,974 $15,072 $16,225 $17,497 $19,139 $21,912 $25,740 $30,503 STEP IV $10,611 $11,230 $11,951 $12,683 $13,541 $14,710 $15,866 $17,079 $18,418 $20,146 $23,065 $27,095 $32,108 CITY OF OROlfO CQPKIISATiai PiM EXPECTED PEXFOMANCE LEVELS PAiT Tlf€ KEGULAP POSITIONS 1993 LEVEL STEP STEP STEP STEP CLERICAL I CL2/SII MAX) 2 S8.590 S9.095 t9.600 S10.106 POLICE SECY (L4/SI MAX) 4 S9.163 S9.703 S10.241 S10.781 PATROL OFFICER (LA/SI MAX) 6 SI0.627 SI1.252 f11.878 S12.503 TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator December 9, 1992 //'s COi>.>jCiL MEETING DEC 1 4 1992 CITYOFORONO SUBJECT: Extension of Joint Powers Agreement of the West Hennepin Recycling Commission ATTACHMENTS 1. 2. 3. 4. Letter From Amelia Kroeger, Recycling Coordinator Amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement Copy of the Current Joint Powers Agreement A Resolution to Extend the Joint Powers Agreement Through 1993 A resolution extending the term of the joint powers agreement for the West Hennepin Recycling Commission is presented for Council approval. There are two changes in the Joint Powers Agreement; one is related to the method of financial accounting for the Commission and one is related to the method of collecting city contributions which fund the Commission. The City of Medina had been providing accounting services to the Commission but has decided not to provide them in 1993. The Recycling Coordinator will now take on responsibility for the financial accounting activities. The method of collecting the dues or contributions from the member cities has also been changed. The contribution amounts will now be withheld from the Hennepin County Recycling Grant amounts rather than being collected from the cities through a direct payment to the Commission. It is recommended the amendments to the Joint Powers Agreement be approved and that the resolution extending the Joint Powers Agreement through 1993 be adopted. r A Memo from Amelia Kroeger WEST HENNEPIN RECYCLING COMMISSION November 30, 1992 To: WHRC City Re:The Enclosed Items 1. Joint Powers Resolution Please have your Mayor and City Council implement the attached Resolution for 1993. I have also enclosed an amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement for theirs and your information. This amendment became necessary because Medina has reguested that WHRC begin handling it's own account beginning in 1993. You may want to include a copy of the WHRC Joint Powers Agreement for reference when requesting this Resolution. Please return this Resolution form to me before the end of January 1993. Thank you. 2. Final 1992 ffHRC Contribution Billing This billir.y represents the final two installments for your City. It appears that WHRC will maintain a reasonable balance going into 1993. Consequently, I have cc.nbined the fourth and fifth payment for 1992. This combined billing reflects a 10% decrease for the balance of your City's share. 3. Holiday Shopping Brochure I am leaving a small number of these brochures at your City Hall. Please put them right on your counter, and ask residents if they would like one when they come in during the month of December. This is a very helpful brochure for folks interested in reducing their holiday trash. -OVER- Prioted on Recycled Paper « ______________ 1992 Reinburseable Recycling Expenses If you have not already done so, please send me your city's reimburseable expense statement for the second half of 1992. I need your statenent no later than ner!<»iiitv»r n . Expenses that qualify for reimbursement include: 1. Expenses related to drop-sites, if applicable, 2. The percentage of any newsletter and the same percentage of postage thereof, your city sent that included recycling information. Qualifying newsletters need to state that 80% funding comes from the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners. Three copies of each newsletter needs to be submitted with your statement. 3. The number of recycling bins purchased by your city in 1992 that were for new households. If your city received payment for any recycling bins, these do not qualify. In order to satisfy Hennepin County Recycling Grant accountability, a copy of your paid invoice for these expenses needs to be submitted with your statement. Several cities did not submit e>penses for January - June, 1992. In such case, one statement can be submitted for Japuary - December, 1992. West Hennepin Recycling Commission Amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement November 30, 1992 2. COMMISSION (add item f.) f. Financial Accountability. The Commission shall establish a separate checking account for West Hennepin Recycling Commission (WKRC) authorizing Commission representatives to sign checks. Two authorized signatures will be required at all times on each check. The Commission will iclude costs of maintaining checking account in its annual budget. An annual honesty bond will be required in an amount not to exceed 10% of anticipated annual WHRC financial activity. The Commission will reimburse Recycling Coordinator for the cost of securing honesty bond. FUNDING In order to simplify this funding, cities' contributions to WHRC will be paid by withholding a third of each annual share from Hennepin County grant reimbursement check. The formula for determining city contributions the WHRC ($163, plus $.75 per household, or Greenfield $ 523 Independence 835 Long Lake 7?7 Loretto 2' j Maple Plain 654 Medina 892 Orono 2,134 remains the same. Printed on Recycled Paper RESOLUTION TO EXTEND TERM OF JOINT POWERS AGREEiMENT OF WEST HENNEPIN RECYCLING COMMISSION By the City of WHEREAS the cities of Greenfield, Independence, Long Lake, Loretto, Maple Plain, Medina and Orono operated their recycling programs through West Hennepin Recycling Commission, a Joint Powers established under the authority of Minnesota Statutes section 471.59 since 1986, and WHEREAS this has allowed the above listed cities to share recycling costs and expenses with the benefit of reducing costs to the cities, and WHEREAS the City of__ _ _ _ . - . - -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ wishes to continue the program and cost sharing as outlined in the West Hennepin Recycling Commission Joint Powers Agreement; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of -- authorizes the extension of the West Hennepin Recycling Commission Joint Powers Agreement through December 31, 1993. Motion to adopt resolution made by and seconded by _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ In favor: Opposed: Printed on Keoycled Paper I RESOLUTION TO EXTEND TERM OP JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT OF WEST HENNEPIN RECYCLING COMMISSION WHEREASr the cities of Greenfield, Independence, Long Lake, Loretto, Maple Plain, Medina and Orono operated their recycling programs through West Hennepin Recycling Commission, a Joint Powers established under the authority of Minnesota Statutes section 471.59 since 1986, and WHEREAS, this has allowed the above listed cities to share recycling costs and expenses with the benefit of reducing costs to the cities, and WHEREAS, the City of Orono wishes to continue the program and cost sharing as outlined in the West Hennepin Recycling Commission Joint Powers Agreement; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Orono authorizes the extension of the West Hennepin Recycling Commission Joint Powers Agreement tL ugh December 31, 1993. Motion to adopt resolution i..ade by and seconded by ________________________. In favor: Opposed: Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 14, 1? »2. ATTEST:Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk JOINT POWEP.S AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made by and among the Cities of Greeniieid, indeoendince LonS lake. Loretto. Maple (hereinafter referred to collectively as whe Participants is effective on the day and year provided herein. 1 PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY. This Agreement is entered into under the authority of Minnesota Statutes section 471...9. T..e Participants have determined that it is to their mutual a-vantage to form a single Joint powers entity that shall estaoiisn ana operate within the present and future boundaries of the Participants a program for recycling acceptable materials. the proposed recycling program (the "Program"), residents wil encouraged to deposit recyclables at central collection facilities established and operated under this Agreement. The central collection facilities will be supplemented by a mo*,:le collection unit that will travel on a periodic basis between several satellite locations. The collected recyclable materials will be hauled to commercial recycling centers where they will be sold. Cities may also offer curbside recycling to residents. 2. COMMISSION. There is hereby created the West Hennepin Recycling Commission (the "Commission") consisting of seven commissioners. a. Annointment and Term. The governing body of each participant shall, by a majority vote, appoint a or may not be an elected official of the Participant s, to serve as TcoJlSissioner. Appointments shall be for a two year period unless the respective governing body makes the appointment for a Tester period."^ Commissioners shall serve until are appointed and qualified. Vacancies shall be unexpired term by the appropriate governing body. A vacancy occurs upon the death or resignation of a commissioner. b. rnmoenaatlon. Commissioners shall serve without compensation by the Commission. Reimbursement of expenses for each commissioner shall be governed by state statutes and the charter, ordinances, and policies of the Participant tha commissioner represents. r:. officers. The Commission shall choose one of its ^ ^ members as a chairperson. The chairperson shall be appointed by commission action at the first meeting of the coordinator shall act as secretary-treasurer. shall preside at all meetings of the Commission. J^® treasurer shall keep a complete record of each ®®®f proceedings and business of the Commission and shall ^®®P accurate accounting of all receipts and disbursements the Commission. The chairperson and all contracts authorized by and in -the name of the Commission. d. Meetincs. The Commission shall meet at such times and places as It shall deem appropriate but at least once every twelve months. All meetings shall be open to the public. e. Voting Requirements. Ail actions of the Commission shall require a simple majority of the commissioners present and voting. A majority of the commissioners shall constitute a quorum. 3. POWERS. The Commission shall establish and oversee the operation of the Program. The Commission shall have the authority to: (a) enter into contracts in accordance with Minnesota statutes section 471.345, subd. 5. as may be necessary to accomplish its purpose; (b) hire, on an independent contractor basis, such persons as are necessary to operate the Program, including, but not limited to a Program Coordinator; (c) lease a site for a central collection facility; and (d) apply for and administer grant monies as necessary to fund * c. Program. In no event shall the Commission incur obligations in excess of its funding as provided in paragraph 4. FUNDING. Funding for the operation fo the Program shall come from grant monies, Hennepin County, funds from any sale of recyclable materials, and city contributions. The cities agree to the following formula for funding in 1990: $163.00 plus $ .75 per household Greenfield. . . . . . . . . . . .5 523.00 Independence. . . . . . . . . . 835.00 Long Lake. . . . . . . . . . . . 736.75 Loretto. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269.50 Maple Plain. . . . . . . . . . . ®52.50 Medina. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892.00 Orono. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,134.00 Each Participant shall contribute' 10% of its share by January 30, 1991, thereafter up to 22.5% will be contributed quarterly as needed. Each Participant agrees t<~ contribute to the Commission any funds It receives from any ccirce for projects or procraras Involvina recyclable materials. In addition, the Participants may, but are not obi Hated to contribute additional funds to the Commission for the operation of the Program. * 2 ^ Ea(-.: Participant shail provide funds for any curbside program for that city in excess of the money available from Hennepin County. 5. PUBLIC EDUCATION. The Participants agree to assist in the distribution of recycling“related information. The distribution of such informction shall be distributed via municipal newsletters, water bill enclosures, general media news releases, and other mutually agreeable communication methods. 6. EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this Ageeement shail be t?.e date upon which the last of the seven Participants has caused this Agreement to be executed pursuant to an authorizing resolution of its governing body. 7. rSRM. This Agreement shall continue in effect ^nti_l__^c^n^er_ 31, 1 9 o S S i ciieweii . uIT' the Participants pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 8 below. 8. MODIFICATION. This Agreement may be extended, renewed, terminated or amended by agreement of all the Participants as authorized by resolution of each Participant's governing body. 9. WITHDRAWAL. A Participant may withdraw prior to the expiration of the term of thic Agreement or any subsequent_ extensions thereof by giving 90 lays' notice in the form of a resolution of its governing bodv. served by certified mail on the secretary-treasurer of the Commission. Service shall be deemed to have been made on the date of mailing. Any grant monies or other funds received by the withdrawing Participant or the Commission, either prior to or after the effective date of withdrawal, that are attributable to the Participant's participation in the Program prior to its withdrawal, shall be paid to and remain the property of the Commission. 10. DISTRIBUTION UPON TERMINATION*. Upon expiration of or termination of this Agreement, any assets remaining after the payment of outstanding obligations shall be distributed to the Participants in proportion to their monetary contributions calculated over the life of the Agreement. 11. LIABILITY AND WORKERS’ COMPENSATION INSURANCE. It is understood and agreed that public liability insurance and workers' compensation insurance will be provided relative to the activities of the Commission and its waste recycling collection. It is anticipsitsd that tha Citias of Madinar Greanfiald and Independence will arrange for this coverage and that, in the event either city incurs any cost as a result of such coverage, the Commission wiM reimburse said City for such cost. -3- 12. ADDITIONAL PARTICIPANTS. The number of Participants may be increased durincj the term of this Agreement by amendment, puj^suant to the provisions of paragraph 3 above; provided that any new Participant shall also cause the Agreement as amended to be executed, pursuant to authorising resolution of its governing body. 13. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. The Commission is empowered to appoint an Executive Committee consisting of three commissioners and the Coordinator. The Executive Committee shall meet at least one time per month and shall have the authority to conduct day-to-day business of the Commission, but shall not have authority to: (a) approve contracts or expenditures in excess of $1,000; (b) approve the budget; (c) establish annual contribution requirements (d) create recycling regulations; or (e) set recycling policies or procedures. The Coordinator shall keep the Commission regularly informed of the activities of the Executive Committee by distribution of written minutes to each city clerk and each city's commissioner following each Executive Committee meeting. The Commission shall appoint the Executive Committee members annually. • • IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Cities of Greenfield, Independence, Long Lake, Loretto, Ma^’le Plain; Medina and Orono have, pursuant to authorixing resolution hereto attached, caused this Agreement to be duly executed. -4- CITY OF GRcENFIELD By _Its Mayor lls ClerK Date CITY OF INDEPENDENCE Its Mayor Its ClerK Date CITY OF LONG LAKE By_ _ _ _ _ _ _ Its Mayor Its Clerk Date CITY OF LORETTO Its Mayor Its Clerk Date ICITY OF MAPLE PLAIf, By_____________ its Mayor Its ClerK Date CITY OF MEDINA Its Mayor Its ClerK Date CITY OF i^ONO By . A/gj’Atl,. Its ClerK Date Cn r ^0 r .• » TO; FROH: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse# City Administrator December 10, 1992 SUBJECT: Resolution Exempting Property at 175 Landmark Drive from Inclusion in the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project; Although the property at 175 Landmark Drive was originally included in the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project, the Council has directed staff to exclude the property from the project based on the criteria developed concerning exclusion of properties from the project. The attached resolution outlines the exclusion criteria and formalizes the exclusion from the project. A RBSOLOTION EXEMPTING THE PROPERTY AT 175 LANDMARK DRIVE FROM INCLUSION IN THE STUBBS BAT SEWER PROJECT WHEREAS, Lee and Julie Barren are owners of the property located at 175 Landmark Drive, legally described as Lot 2, Block 2, Bayside Landing, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property")? and WHEREAS, the property was originally included within the boundaries of the area to be served by the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project? and WHEREAS, the City Council in 1991 adopted criteria for exemption from the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project, Properties included in the project boundaries were allowed to be exempt from the project if: 1. Lot area exceeds 2.0 acres. 2.Property contains conforming existing septic system and tested and approved alternate drainfield site, and property owners agree to maintain alternate drainfield sites for future use. 3.Property does not abut a trunk line and is not adjacent to a neighborhood lateral required to serve neighboring properties upstream in the lateral system? and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the property and the property owners ’ request and has determined that the property qualifies for exemption from the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project? and WHEREAS, the applicants have signed a settlement agreement with the City of Orono regarding applicants' assessment appeal, in which the City agreed to exclude the property from the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota that the property at 175 Landmark Drive shall be excluded from the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project, shall not be assessed for such project, and shall not be provided with sanitary sewer service as part of said project. Page 1 of 2 I Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono# Minnesota on this 14th day of Decemberr 1992. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Rallin, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrui nt was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of December, 1992 by Barbara A. Peterson 6 Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 2 of 2 i; h ■ TO: PROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator December 1, 1992 5/ COli.'yiCIL MEETING DEC 1 4 1992 CnYOFORONO SUBJECT: 1992 and 1993 Budget Adjustments Severe ’ expenditures for items needed in 1992 require budget adjustments for the 1992 and /or 1993 budgets. These amendments either reallocate 1992 expenditures, or reallocate expenditures from the 199? budget to the 1992 budget. The adjustments do not increase ei?penditure- beyond budgeted amounts. The expenditure items include the payment of back charges for fire service from the City of Maple Plain and the purchase of computer equipment for the new city facilities. Also, the Public Works Department has requested the replacement of a truck mounted Sander. 1. Maple Plain Fire Service Charges. The 1993 budget initially included $11,570 to pay back charges for fire service from the City of Maple Plain. This amount was deleted from the 1993 budget when it was determined that this amount could be paid with the funds from the 1992 budget. It is recommended the 1992 budget be amended to reflect the payment of e Maple Plain Fire Department back charges. 2. Computer Equipment. The 1993 equipment outlay fund e.xpenditures include the purchase of a laser printer and 4 personal computers. In order to coordinate t:.e avai lav.i 1 ity of the computers and printer with the move to the new fac, <ty, it is important that this equipment be purchased in 1992. The budget adjustment requested is to authorize the *xpenditure of $10,600 from the equipment outlay fund in 199.. and delete the same amount from the 1993 expenditures. 3. The 1992 Budget incl'-'ed $122,500 in expenditures from the equipment out ay fund, to date $35,274 of that amount remains unexpended. This is due m.'.‘nly to the deferral of t?-*o purchases; 1.) a civil defv-se siren for the Crystaj Bay area ($17,650) and 2.) a curb ' .chine for the street f apartment ($17,000). It is recommended that $1,500 of the unexpended amount be used to replace a truck mounted sander* Please see the attached memo faom Jack Brinkhaus, Public Works Supervisor. Council Action Requested. Motion to approve budget amendment*: to the 199,1 and 1993 budgets to reflect the expenditures indicated ;o-ve. /! TO: FROM: DATE: Ron Moorse» City Administrator Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk ^9o December 10, 1992 SUBJECT: Special Assessment Deferments - Stubbs Bay Sewer Project ATTACHMENTS A. B. C. Orono Code Section 2.62 Deferment of Special Assessments Resolution No. 3175 Amending the Program for Deferment of Special Assessments for Persons 65 Years of Age or Older Adopted 8/24/92 Proposed Resolutions for Rose Madden and Hazel Anderson The City of Orono has established a process for the deferment of special assessments on property owned and homestead by senior citizens who meet certain criteria. (See Attachment A) The following persons have applied for deferment of special assessments on the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project assessment roll. Rose Madden 350 Crestview Avenue P.I.D. 05-117-23 14 0057 Ass''ssment Amount - $8,840.00 and Hazel Anderson 3780 Bayside Road P.I.D. 05-117-23 21 0005 Assessment Amount - $4,340.00 It has been determined these persons qualify for the deferment of special assessments as defined in Ordinance No. 2.62 and the income requirements established in Resolution No. 3175 adopted August 24, 1992. Requested Action - Council adopt the attached resolutions approving the special assessemnt deferment for Rose Madden and Hazel Anderson. i I • ' I SBC. 2.62. DEFERMENT OP SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. UrtP^lWEXTr \\ Subd. 1. The Council may defer the payment of any special assessment on homestead property owned by a person who is 65 years of age or older, or who is retired by virtue of permanent and total disability, and the Cit> Cleric is hereby authorized to record the deferment of special assessments where the following conditions are met: A. The applicant must apply for the deferment not later than ninety days after the assessment is adopted by the Council. B. The applicant must be 65 years of age, or older, or retired by virtue of permanent and total disability. C. The applicant must be the owner of the property. D. The applicant must occupy the property as his principal place of residence. E. The applicant's income from all sources shall not exceed the low income limit as established by the Department of Housing and Urban Development as used in determining the ei;,gibility for Section VIII housing. Subd. 2. The deferment shall be granted for as long a period of time as the hardship exists and the conditions as aforementioned have been met. However, it shall be the duty of the applicant to notify the City Cleric of any change in his status that would affect eligibility for deferment. Subd. 3. The entire an.ount of deferred special assessments shall be due within sixty days after loss of eligibility by the applicant. If the special assessment is not paid within sixty days, the City Cleric shall add thereto interest at 8% per annum from the due date through December 21 of the following year and the total amount of principal and interest shall be certified to the County Auditor for collection with taxes the following year. Should the applicant plead and prove, to the satisfaction of the Council, that full repayment of t^'e deferred soecial assessment would cause the applicant part■'.cxilar undue financial hardship, the Council may order that the a:>plicant pay within sixty days a sum equal to the number of installments of deferred special assessments outstanding and unpaid to date (including principal and interest) with the balance thereafter P^id according to the terms and conditions of the original special assessment. Subd. 4. The option to defer the payment of special assessments shall terminate and all amounts accumulated plus applicable interest shall become due upon the occurrence of any one of the following: A. The death of the owi. 'r when there is no spouse who is eligible for deferment. D. The sale, transfer or subdivision of all or any part, of the property. C. Loss of homestead status on the property. D. Determination by the Council for any reason that there would be no hardship to require immediate or partial payment. irrcvC:-^ CITYof ORONO RES0LUTI4 »N OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________ A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE PROGRAM FOR ASSESSMENTS FOR PERSONS 65 YEARS OP AGE OR OLDER IIHEREASr the City Council of the City of Orono is the official governing body of the City of Orono; and fIBBREAS, M.S.A. Section 435.193 through authorizes the City of Orono, upon proper application, to det the payment of special assessments against any i^of^the owned by a person 65 years of age or older on January 1 of the payment^year and for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments: and IfHBRBAS# Section 435,194 authorized the municipality to establish an interest rate to be added to the which shall be payable in addition to the ® g2 and that Orono had adopted such a program under , (1984 recodified). Resolution 1093 (dated November f”? Resolution 1779 (dated June 10, 1985) and Resolution 2844 (dated August 27, 1990). WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the deferral of assessments should f °Qro^ onqualified who makes proper application to the City of Orono forms prescribed by the County Assessor of Hennepin County an y the Orono Citj Council and for whom the City Council that it would be a hardship to make the payments, based upon the following criteria; Number of Persons in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Household Maximum Income $27,000 30,900 34,750 38,600 41,700 44,800 47,850 50,950 Assets not including homesteaded property of $25,000, income and afsets as defined^ in Hennepin County's Utility Connection Program. ! o GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3175 HON, THBRBPORB, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COOHCIL OP THE CITY OP ORONO IH A REGULAR MEETING ASSEMBLED, that the assessments against any homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older and for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments, be deferred for a period of time not to exceed five years subject to the aforementioned financial criteria, upon submission of an appropriate application signed by the qualified person, and which may upon expiration of initial or any subsequent renewal deferments may be reapplied for, and subject to the applicant meeting all the necessary criteria upon reapplication be deferred for an additional period not to exceed 5 years; and BE IT PURTHBR RESOLVED, that the right of deferment is automatically terminated under Section 435.195 if: 1. The owner dies and the spouse is not otherwise eligible; 2. The property or any part thereof is sold, transferred or subdivided; 3. The property should lose its homestead status; or 4. If for any reason the City determines that there would be no hardship to require immediate or partial payment. Adopted by the City Council the the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held August 24, 1992. h. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST €orot>.- M,fallin. City Clerk /I Yrmi+^/ncoT A RESOLOTION APPROVING A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEFERMENT FOR ROSE MADDEN «» WHEREAS, the City Council has ordered a local improvement project known as Stubbs Bay 1992 Sanitary Sewer Improvement for which special assessments have been levied against the benefitted properties; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted Resolution No. 1093, Resolution No. 1779, Resolution No. 2864 and Resolution No. 3175 establishing a policy and procedure for deferring such special assessments for persons 65 years of age or older who have limited income and assets and for whom payment of such special assessment would constitute a financial hardship; and WHEREAS, Rose Madden has made an application for deferment of the above noted special assessment pursuant to the provisions of Resolution No. 3175. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orcno hereby finds that the applicant has demonstrated a hardship consistent with the provisions of Resolution No. 3175, and hereby orders deferral of the payment for the levied special assessments as follows: APPLICANT: Rose Mary Madden ADDRESS:350 Crestview Avenue LEVY NO. 12554 PROPERTY I.D. NUMBER 05-117-23-14-0057 LEVIED AMOUNT $8,840.00 AMOUNT DEFERRED $8,840.00 Deferral of payment for principal and interest shall be for a period of time not to exceed five (5) years with the first nayment of principal and interest due in collection year 1998. Interest at the rate of 6.5% per annum shall be added to the deferred assessment. Deferred principal and interest shall be payable at the time of the first payment due in collection year 1998. The remainder of the principal and interest shall thereafter be payable in accordance with the adopted assessment roll. This right of deferment is automatically terminated in collection year 1998 or upon the occurrence of any one or more of the following conditions, whichever may occur first: 1. The owner dies and the spouse is not otherwise eligible. 2. The property or any part thereof is sold, transferred, or subdivided; 3. The property should lose its homestead status; or 4. If for any reason the City determines that there would be no hardship to require immediate or partial payment. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota on this 14th day of December, 1992. ATTEST: Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk r /lTTti<iMm.eX)r- Q_ A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEFERMENT FOR HAZEL ANDERSON WHEREAS, the City Council has ordered a local improvement project known as Stubbs Bay 1992 Sanitary Sewer Improvement for which special assessments have been levied against the benefitted properties; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted Resolution No. 1093, Resolution No. 1779, Resolution No. 2864 and Resolution No. 3175 establishing a policy and procedure for deferring such special assessments for persons 65 years of age or older who have limited income and assets and for whom payment of such special assessment would constitute a financial hardship; and WHEREAS, Hazel Huenerloth Anderson has made an application for deferment of the above noted special assessment pursuant to the provisions of Resolution No. 3175. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby finds that the applicant has demonstrated a hardship consistent with the provisions of Resolution No. 3175, and hereby orders deferral of the payment for the levied special assessments as follows: APPLICANT: Hazel Huenerloth Anderson ADDRESS:3780 Bayside Road LEVY NO. PROPERTY I.D. NUMBER LEVIED AMOUNT AMOUNT DEFERRED 12554 05-117-23-21-0005 $4,340.00 $4,340.00 Deferral of payment for principal and interest shall be for a period of time not to exceed five (5) years with the first payment of principal and interest due in collection year 1998. Interest at the rate of 6.5% per annum shall be added to the deferred assessment. Deferred principal and interest shall be payable at the time of the first payment due in collection year 1998. The remainder of the principal and interest shall thereafter be payable in accordance with the adopted assessment roll. This right of deferment is automatically terminated in collection year 1998 or upon the occurrence of any one or more of the following conditions, whichever may occur first: 1. The owner dies and the spouse is not otherwise eligible. 2. The property or any part thereof is sold, transferred, or subdivided; 3. The property should lose its homestead status; or 4.If for any reason the City determines that there would be no hardship to require immediate or partial payment. Adopted Sjy the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota on this L4th day of December, 1992. ATTEST: Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator December 1, 1992 V COUNCIL MEETING DEC 1 4 1992 CITYOFORONO SUBJECT: Appointment to the Long Lake Fite Department Advisory Board The City of Long Lake's proposal regarding the provision of fire service to Orono in 1993 included the formation of a fire advisory commission which would consist of representatives from each of the cities served by the Long LaKe Fire Department. The purpose of the Fire Advisory Commission is to provide a formalized communication channel between the cities and th<^? fire department. Because he is most familiar with the area of public safety, and because he has developed a working relationship with the City of Long L_Ke related to police service, it is recommended that Chief Sullivan be appointed as the city's representative to the Long Lake Fire Advisory Commission. r ii ‘-7 TO: FROM: Ron Mcorse» City Administrator John R. Gerhardson» Public Works Director j9 tI9qi' DATE:December B, 1992 SUBJECT: Janitorial Se*vices New Facility "Requests for Proposals (RFP) Recently we received requests for proposals for janitorial services for the new facility. Janitorial services are provided for the following: Council Chambers Administration Office Police Office Public Works Officesr Bathroom & Lunchroom Only The following companies submitted proposals: Como'ircial Building Maintenance (CBM) Pikes Building Maintenance Red Carpet Cleaning To%m & Country Office Cleaning $1,479.58 + 6.5% ST 1,562.45 + 101.56 ST 1,230.00 905.00 After review of all proposals, it is recommended to contract with Town 6 Country Services for $905.00 per month. TO; PROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator December 1, 1992 0 V •..oil r/.EcTING SUBJECT: Volunteer Commission Vacancies DEC 1 4 1992 CITY OF ORONO The Park Commission currently has two vacancies and the Planning Commission will have one vacancy when Charles Kelley joins the Council on January 1. In addition, several other members of the Planning and Park Commissions will complete their current terms in the coming months. It is recommended advertisements be placed in the official newspaper requesting applications for positions on the volunteer commissions. The following is a list of commission members whose terms will expire in the coming months: PLANNING COMMISSION Maureen Bellows Stephen Peterson Charles Schroeder Edward Cohen Jeffrey Johnson Candace Rowlette Original Appointment 02/86 0 3/92 04/91 02/87 02/87 05/90 Previous Re-Appointment 0^/92 03/92 03/92 05/92 05/92 PARK COMMISSION Susan Wilson Phil Bradley Position 05/90 PIAIIHIN6 COMMISSION ATTENDANCE KECORD FOR 1992 Kelley Bellows Johnson Cohen Rowlette Schroeder Peterson* 1/21/92 2/18/92 3/16/92 Y y Y N Y N Y N N 4/20/92 5/18/92 6/15/92 7/20/92 Y N Y M N y N Y 8/3/92 Y(late) Y 8/17/92 9/21/92 10/19/92 Y 11/16/92 Y Y Y y Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y N 12/14/92 Charles Kelley Maureen Bellows Ed Cohn Jeff Johnson Candace Rowlette Charles Schroeder Stephen Peterson Appointment Date December 198i February 1986 February 1987 February 1987 Nay 1990 April 1991 March 1992 Y N Y y Y Y Y Y N Y Y y Y Y Y Y N N N N y Y •^e (S.MOOS) (S.MOOS) Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y «• i > . J (o TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator O-^cember 7, 1992 1 4 SUBJECT: Plans for the Move to the New City Facilities The current plans are to move all furniture and equipment from the current City Administration building to the new City Facilities on Monday, December 28th. This will include moving the phone system and the LOGIS computer network system. The move is to begin at 8:00 a.m. and be completed by 4:30 p.m. Because the move will cause major disruption at both facilities, it is planned that City Hall will be closed to normal business for the day. The closing of City Hall should not be a problem since the week between Christmas and New Years is normally the slowest week of the year. Also, it will not be unexpected that the City Hall is closed on the Monday after the Christmas weekend. Ia: k n TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator December 8, 1992 COUNCIL MEEHN6 DEC 1 4 1992 CITYOFORONO SUBJECT: Public Works Vehicle Service Equipment Application and Certificate for Payment No. 1 and No. 2 ATTACHMENT: Application and Cettificate for Payment No. 1 and No. 2 - Zahl Equipment Company We have received from John Rail of Boarman and Associates approved applications for payment of vehicle service equipment from Zahl Equipment Company as follows: - Application No. 1 for a pressure washer system and air compressor# $10#693.67. - Application No. 2 for Graco lubrication system# $12#673.50. Requested Action: Council approval of Architect's Application and Certificate for Payment No. 1 and No. 2 ao presented. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _# seconded by _# to approve Architect's Application and Certificate for Payment No. 1 and No. 2 for vehicle service equipment# in the total amount of $23#367.17 to Zahl Equipment Company. Motion# Ayes # Nays . L 8 fM O APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT /4M oocuMwr CTQj uwiwtiont w f<y«we sidei i*cionio » wcw KXOWNtW: CITY OF ORONO P*0|ia: ORONO MUNICIPAL FACILITIES ^'CAUON NO; I BID PACKAGE #3 Pf RIOO TO; VIA (AKCHiTtcn: BOARMAN & ASSC. P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 FROM (CONTRACTCRI: ZAHL EQUIP. CO. 3101 SPRING ST. N.E. VEHI^fe^§feR\!?CE^^QA?P .contract FOR: 222 NORTH 2ND ST. MPLS., MN 55401 DiUribulion lo: XlOWNIR SARCHinCT □ CONTRACTOR ARCMina'S □ PROlia NO: BIO □ PACKAGE #3 CONTRACT DATI: 6/15/92 CONTRACTOR'S APPUCATION FOR PAYMENT 3ROER SUMMARY 1 Change Ordtrf appromd In prevkHif monibf bf Owner TOTAL AOOtTIONS OfDUCTIONS Approved thif Month •Number Dale Approved 1 1 TOTAIS 1 Net change by Chanit Orderf i Application if madt for P^ymMl, m shcawfi b€km« In connection iRrith the ConiracI, ConlimuliM SAttl» AIA f>octtiiicnl CTO* If attached. 1. ORICiNM CONTRACT SUM..............................S , li 7.^ 2. gO .. . 2. Nat cfcaMM kr ChaiiM OtRM..................................S 3. CONTRACT SUM TO OAlf (liM T s2).......................S. , ■ ■ 4.10TMCOMnniO ASTORfOTO OAli...................S-LQxSzia^ The undersigned Contractor certifiM that lo iht b«« of the Contractor^ knoiwledge. •nfornuilon and belief the Work covered by thit Appticaiion fo* Payntent hat been completed In accordatKe with the Contract Oocumenit, that all amounts have been paid by Ihe Contractor for Work for which previous Certificates fo# Payment were issued and payments received from the Owner, and lhal current payment shown hwein is ruNv due. CONTRACTOR: •y n.... ICotumn C on CTtDI 5. tCIAINACf: a. % of Completed WoHi t--------------------— iCoHimn f on C703I b____% of Stored Material S ■ ■ —— iCoHimn F on C703I Total Retainafe liinc Sa Sb or IbUl In Column I of C703I ..................................S---------------------- 6. TOTAL lAtNfD USS tnAINACI............................. I--------------------- nine 4 lef f line S IbiaM 7. LESS ruvious atfifiCAm for FAVMiMT nine A from prior Cerllfkalel..............I i ■ 8. CURitNI FAYMINT pUf...........................................t \Q%92 jJk L 9. iAUNa TO FINISHp flOS RHAINACI.....................S nine 3 lef f Line M State of: County of: Subfcrlbed and twom to before me thif day of Notary Public: My Commiifion etpiref: e«9 ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT In Kcordance niih the Contract Oocumenls. bated on on-f ite observations and ihe data comprising the above application, the Archiiect certifies to ihe Owner that lo the best of the AKhnect i knowledge, information and belief ihe Work has progressed as Indicated, the quality of the Work Is in Kcordance with the ContrKt Documents, and the Contractor is entitled lo payment of the AMOUNT CERTIFIID. AMOUNT CERTIFlfO Mrrach eap/anar^ if amqiirn c ARCHITECT - Hn»M u'Date:jM paAblelmliThis Certificate if not n^idble. The AMOUNT CERTIFIID If bnly to the Contractor named hereiiCTsfvance, payment and KceptarKeol payment are withom preiudtce to any rtghlf of the Owner or ContrKlOf under thif ContrKt.________ aiaoocuvuNi OTfamiCAnoNANOCiatiMcaniotmrAeNfMAt itai fottiON • aiv t iwi tm AMiKiCAN iNStiruti or aicmhicis . tm niw toa* avinu . n w, wAsniNcroN. oc. icam cm-%m ortf § A •c 1 •9 c H 1ffMHOlDcsaurnoNOfwow%SOKOUUOVMUX MOftccoMnmo MAHilAiS lOUicOMnmoANOSfOttOlocmicD4i4n %fC^O 9MAHalOfWMNIC-O wmnacif HOM PWKXiS AmjomoNo«o THisnnoo ptcjiwny S10MO iNor Mooao1LUBE CUBE TANK $1,076.00'•$1,076.00$1,076.0010024” EMERGENCY VENT 134.00 134.00 134.0010032" VENT 10.00 10.00 10.00 10042” CAP 10.00 10.00 10.00 1005TANK GAUGE 60. OO • 1 .60.00 60.00 100 m 6 PRESSURE WASHER 3,515.00 3,515.00 3,515.00 100 7 CHAMPION AIR • COMPRESSER * # • 5,236.00 • 5,236.00 5,236.00 100 ►♦ * $10.041.0(S10.041.0( # ■ •1 '■'■'..I ■^:r APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT AIA document C702 {instructions on reverse side) MCCONCOf HfKCiSTO {OWNER):CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN PROJECT: ORONO MUNICPAL FACILITY BID PACKAGE #355323 APPIICATION NO: 2 PERIOD TO:FROM (CONTRACTOR): ZAHL EQUIPMENT COMPANY3101 SPRING ST. N.E. MPLS., MN 55413CONTRACT FOR: VEHICLE SERVICE EQUIP.VIA (ARCHITECT):BOARMAN & ASSC. 222 NORTH 2ND ST. MPLS., MN 55401 Distribution to: O OWNER Q ARCHITECT □ CONTRACTORARCHITECT'S BID PACKAGE □PROJECT NO: #3 OCONTRACT DATE: 6/T5/92CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENTCHANCE ORDER SUMMARYChange Orders approved in previous months by OwnerTOTAL ADDITIONS DEDUCTIONSApproved this Month *Number Dale Approved TOTALS Net change by Change Orders Application is made for Payment, as shown below, in connection with the Contract. Continuation Sheet, AIA Document C703, is attached.1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM......................................S 31,712.00__________2. Net change by Change Orders ...................................$3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE {Line 1 ±2).......................$ 3U712.004. TOTAL COMPLETED A STORED TO DATE...................t 23.367.17{Column C on C703)5. RETAINAGE:a. _% of Completed Work $ -{Column D 4- E on C703)b. _% of Stored Material 5 -{Column F on G703) Total Retainage {Line Sa -t- Sb or Total in Column 1 of C703) The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief the Work covered by this Application for Payment has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documents, that all amounts have been paid by the Contractor for Work for which previous Certificates for Payment were issued and payments received from the Owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due. 6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE................................S 23,367.17 {Line 4 less Line 5 Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT {Line 6 from prior Certificate)..............S 8. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE..........................................^2.673.50 9. BALANCE TO FINISH, PLUS RETAINAGE...................\ S (Line 3 less Line 6) CONTRACTOR: By yciJx Date:/^3o 9^ Slate of: County Subscribed and sworn to before me this Notary Public; My Commission expires; isuy'A rUlbTa iwwmr usa —iu RAMSEY OCXJNTY MY ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT In accordance with the Contract Documents, based on on-site observations and the data comprising the above application, the Architect certifies to the Owner that to the best of the Architect's knowledge, information and belief the Work has progressed as indicated, the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, and the Contractor is entitled to payment of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. AMOUNT rFBTmfn 7 i ^ (Attach explanation if amount artUied differs from the amount applied for.) ARCHITECT: Mill • . By:______________________________________Date: - MyableThis Certificate is not n^iable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only to the Contractor named hereinTlsiuance, payment and acceptance of payment are without prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor under this Contract. AIA OOCUMtNT G7t2 • APTI tr ATION AND CERTIFICATI FOR F^YMINT • MAY 198J EDITION • AIA* • C 1*10) IHf AMIRK'AN INSTlTffU AROlirrCI^. N»'*' AVfr.'liF. NW. VVACIIINCIOFI PC ?OOO0 C702-1M3 h i;^ •- f Insifuctions on fcvcrse side) ffd Qwt or^PPLlCATION NO: 2 Olsirlbution lo:O OWNCRPERIOD TO: O ARCHITECTPERIOD lu. O CONTRACTORARCHITECT'S BID PACKAGE □PROIECT NO: #3 ^CONTRACT PATE: 6/15/92ni. as shown below, in conne^on with Ihc Coniracl. intent C703, Is aUached.. 3U712.00_________A....................................• —------.....tti.Tir.w I—mo TO DATf................»------------- ib or 1703).................... JNACE ................ al) ATIS f OR n prior Cerllfteatc)fa SSL-t JS RETAINACE < 8.344 County pTore me this •vS __ f ijIgtatrpiMSi m»0gn% ' IVIM86V COUMIY ^______0«.: iy?#i Divabie onhSbble The AMOUNT CERTIFIED Is piyable only to Iho C7f2*1SI3 U' ;e , f CONTINUATION SHEETAU Docunnnl CTin, AmiCATION AND CEKTIFICAIE FOR mirMENT, conUinlne Conlraclor^ signed Certification is attached.In tabulations below, amounts are stalv*d to the nearest dollar.Use Column I on Contracts where variable retainage (or line items may apply.AIA DOLUMENT C703 (Instructions on reverse side) wciAITLICATION NUMBER APPLICATION DATE PERIOD TO ARCHITECT'S PROIECT NO mtXf m HEMNO.DESCRIPTION OF WORKGRACO LUBE EQUIP. SALES TAX SCHEOULEDVALUE WORK COMI'ltUDFROM PREVIOUS AmiCATION tO-f El$11,900.00 $10,041.00 $ 773.50 THIS PERIOD$11,900.00MATERIALS PRESENILY STORED (NOT IN DORE)TOIALCOMPLETED AND STORED TO DATE (D + E*n 1;$21,941.00c + ci BALANCE TO riNISII tC-CI Ireiainae;e i ...iiji I y s# TO;Mayor and City Council FROM:Ron Moorse, City Administrator A ^^0 DATE: w ^ December 10, 1992 SUBJECT:Job Evaluation Study Update The City’s current compensation plan is based on a job evaluation study conducted in 1986. It is important that the job evaluation study be updated at regular intervals. It is recommended the initial step in the update process be a re-evaluation of the department head positions. This will enable the department heads to become familiar with the job evaluation process so that they can effectively assist in administering the process when it is extended to their staff. The job evaluation process evaluates jobs according to several criteria including; level of responsibility, the level of complexity of the job, the level of knowledge and skill required, and working conditions. The job evaluation system used by the city is provided by Personnel Decisions Inc. a human resources consulting firm. The City of Orono participated with a large number of metro and non-metro cities to fund the development of the system. Therefore the cost of updating the study is minimal. The cost for updating department head positions will be approximately $200.00. •:7 Date: To: From: December 10, 1992 Eon Moorse Steve Sullivan A Subject:Authorization to Esteiblish Law Enforcement Explorer Post COUNCIL MEETING DEC 1 4 199? CiTYOFORONO I am requesting authorization from the City Council to establish a Law Enforcement Explorer Post in 1993. The intent is to form a post comprised of high school age students who live in our service area or in cities adjacent to our jurisdiction. The explorers pay for most of their o%m expenses including uniforms. The Horth Tonka Crime Prevention Coalition has agreed to provide financial assistance if necessary for individual explorers to participate. There should be no extra costs to the department. The police advisors would not receive overtime for their work, but rather consider their involvement as part of their normal work duties. This is an exciting program and I look forward to having this positive interaction with the youth in our community. I have attached some selected information ed>out law enforcement explorer programs. •• ♦«• •• ILORING • > ^ fffiPENFGRGENIENf■:-V-.% ♦*' In Coopiratlon wHh the liittrn’alliiMl kis'ocMiiin ol Ciilels ol Police and llin National Slierlirs Association WHAT IS EXPLORING? Exploring is a division of the Boy Scouts of America for young men and women aged 14 through 20. Its purpose is to bring a character building, citizenship training, and fitness program to the youth of America. Explorer posts are organized by businesses, industries, churches, schools, civic clubs, and community organizations which provide adult volunteer leaders, program resources, and meeting facilities. These posts specialize in a variety of career and recreational programs designed to provide service, social, citizenship, outdoor, career, and fitness activities. Career surveys conducted in high schools throughout the country demonstrate a significant level of student interest in law enforcement and criminal justice. As with many high visibility careers, law enforcement often is viewed as a glamorousiirofession which often is distorted by the communications media. Young people want hands*on experience, practical knowledge, and real career information. Exploring seeks to match interested youth with adults who will share their knowledge and skills. Today, there are more than 33,000 young men and women participating in law enforcement Explorer programs in o\ ar 1,600 law enforcement Explorer posts organized by local law enforcement agencies. The International Association of Chiefs of Police, the National Sheriffs Association, and the Exploring Division of the Boy Scouts of America promote the organization of law enforcement Explorer posts to provide opportunities for young adults to explore law enforcement careers, the criminal justice system, and to promote character deveiopment and citizenship training among America's youth. WHAT WOULD A LAW ENFORCEMENT EXPLORER POST DO? The program of an Explorer post is based on matching the program resources of adults in the organization with the needs and interests of Explorers in the post. Each post program is unique, as it is planned around what the organization is able and willing to do. The purposes of the organization and the BSA are best served when a well- rounded program is planned through Exploring's six experience areas—fitness, career, social, service, citizenship, and outdoor. This planning provides students an exciting and worthwhile program leading to personal fitness, citizenship training, and character devel « ment. Law enforcement posts are Involved in a variety of programs and projects featuring safety, training, and service. The program should be a hands-on approach rather than a lecture series. Explorers should have the opportunity to learn about the requirements of law enforcement careers and gain firsthand work experiences. Worthwhile, challenging, and exciting projects and programs are essential to attract and hold young adults, BENEFITS TO YOUTH Exposure to law enforcement careers and professionals. Hands-on experience in the criminal justice system. Relating to others sharing the same interest. Discover career requirements, education, training, and benefits. Awareness ol law enforcement and citizenship. Learn self-discipline and patience. Encouragement to make the most of educational opportunities. BENEFITS TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES Exploring can identify and e icourage future employees. Exploring is a unique comrrunity relations effort. Exploring is a proven, worthwhile, youth program. Exploring offers emplyees opportunities for community leadership and involvement in youth work. I ( EXPLORING. BSA-A COMMUNITY RESOURCE TO HELP LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES SERVE YOUTH •r BENEFITS TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES *■ Xonner*’""'' *“ '•* en'orcement 3. A vehicle to enhance your department s community relations program ^ o "a“sTce«tol Ifw Zo"*''*'® ‘***"*‘’'* «"<' p™ci«s rsssKtsr'™" 7. A cmss to methodology, techniques, organizational guidelines trainino law entercimfm E*"odnt" * regional, and national activities, literature, awards ' and facilities all having tremendous potential for program enrichment. 9. ^sociation with many community partners at BSA*s district council area Sfptorfng*"" **’“ *" “'*‘"9 NOTE: Exploring. BSA. has proven to be a successful vehicle for exoosino f«tem*Cur»I!Ji'® Ilf'”” '** •"<» »h« criminairuslicfsjwtem. Currently, there are more than 34.000 Explorers in 1 m law ?hrmlfhTi!#’if!f®'®' working with Exploring i-f T**.® •'’•*f'>«''onal Association of Chiefs ofPolice ^ to falra^oifllfiv.? f" •*? flwon positive tihdorsementl'"^ become "Ivolf™ ® *"““™®®"®?'!® «»,™®'"‘>®«'» — . t •«evT^ e*" • i-- P #'•' \U4,-.Tr.»»« ; -- -- « ■ a; »-»i .ex . %,v V »^‘rt/yv , . •' "‘•V V i ,• Vi • » .a .A.^. , S • • ' t » • • • j * *« V • * •« «b e«w r« - - ’ a V ^ . , tr. * r • r* • 4. . ee* <^»Ui D^C 12992.2 TO;Mayor Peterson and City Council FROM: DATE: Ron Moorse, City Administrator December 9, 1992 SUBJECT: City Hall and Public Works Buildings Application and Certificate of Payment No. 10 Attachment: Application and Certificate of Kraus-Anderson Construction Co. Midwest Asphalt Amerect, Inc. Northside Construction Vohnoutka Roofing Jansco Caulking LaForce Hardware Twin City Garage Door Co. Hoffer Glass Mulcahy Inc. Dale Tile Co. Swanson & Youngdale Inc. Met-Con Metro, Inc. Allied Mechanical Gephart Electric Payment No. 10 S 29,746.06 47,407.50 2.790.00 14.798.00 20.961.00 3,568.50 8,058.60 21.013.00 30,548.70 22.351.00 13.995.00 15.300.00 7.037.00 72.884.00 88.860.00 We have received from project Construction Manager John Davies approved application for payment of work at the city hall and public works locations as follows: Kraus-Anderson Construction Co. - For .onstruction management services for November, $7,443.00 for site supervision and reimburseable expenses through November 21, $22,303.06 Midwest Asphalt - For paving parking lots $47,407.50 Amerect, Inc. - For steel at city hall/police and public works buildings.. $2,790.00 Northside Construction - For carpentry at police/city hall and public works buildings, $14,798.00 Vohnoutka Roofing - For roofing and sheet metal at city hall/police building, $20,961.00 Jansco Caulking - For caulking at city hall/police and public works buildings, $3,568.50 LaForco Hardware - For wood doors at city hall/police, and public works buildings, $8,058.60 J Twin City Garage Door Co. — For coiling service doors^ overhead doors and controls at the public works building, $21,013.00 Hoffer's Inc - For glass work at city hall/police building, $30,548,70 Mulcahy Inc. - For drywall and exterior insulation and finish system work at the city hall/police and public works buildings, $22,351.00 Dale Tile Co, - For ceramic tile, quarry tile, and slate at the city hall/police and public works buildings, $13,995.00 Swanson & Youngdale, Inc. - For painting and wallcovering at the city hall/police and public works buildings, $15,300.00 Met-Con Metro Inc, - For public works pre^engineered building erection, $7,037.00 Allied Mechanical Systems - For plumbing, heating, venting and air conditioning of city hall/police and public works buildings, $72,884.00 Gephart Electric Company, Inc. - For electrical worx at public works and city hall/police buildings, $88,860.00 The attachments are presented for your approval. Requested Action: Council approval of Architect's Application and Certificate for Payment No. 10 as presented. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , to approve City Hall and Public Works BuilTTngs Architect"^ Application and Certificate for Payment No. 10 in the amount of $399,318,36, as presented. Motion, Ayes , Nays APPUCATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT Page 1 of 1 PagesTO (OWNER): Clly of Orono1335 Brown Road South Crystal Bay, MN 55323 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER: Kraus-Anderson Construction 525 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 PRO 'PCT: Orono City Hall/Policeand Public Works Building ARCHITECT: Boarman Kroos Plister 222 North Second Street Minneapolis, MN 55401 SECTION CONTRACTOR/SUPPLIER CURRENT PAYMENT DUE 100 Kraus-Anderson ♦ $22,303.06 • 02510 Midwest Asphalt • $47,407.50 • 05110 Amerect • $2,790.00 • 06100 Northside Construction • $14,790.00 • 07610 Vohnoutka • $20,961.00 - 07900 Jansco • $3,568.50 • 06110 LaForce Hardware • $8,050.60 ' 08360 Twin City Garage • $21,013.00 • 08410 Hoffer Glass ' $30,548.70 * 09260 Mulcahy, Inc.' $22,351.00 * 09300 Dale Tile Co.• $13,995.00 ' 09900 Swanson & Younqdale • $15,300.00 ' 13120 Metcon $17:987.^ • 15000 Allied Mechanical • $72,004.00 • 16000 Gephart Electric ' $88,060.00 • CM Fee Kraus-Anderson • $7,443.00 ' TOTAL:1 <09.-918.36 APPLICATION NO: TenPERIOD FROM: November 1,1992 PERIOD TO: November 30,1992 ARCHITECTS PROJECT NO: 1124.04 CONTRACT DATE: November 12, 1991 ARCHITECTS CERTIRCATE FOR PAYMENT In accordance with the Contract Documents, based on on-site obsenrations and the data comprising the above situation, the Architect certifies to the Owner that to the best of the Architect ’s knowledge, information and belief the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, and the Contractors are entitled to payment of the AMOUNT INDICATED. ARCHITECT: /' f /MC- By: November 30 , 1992 KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY CONTRACTORS S. CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS City of Orono P.O. Box 66, 1335 Brown Road S Crystal Bay. MN 55423 Attn: Mr. Tom Kuehn Finance Director Re: Orono City Hall K/A Project #4059 Renuest For Payment This request for payment is for on*$ite supervision and reimbursable expenses through November 21, 1992. as per construction manager contract dated November 12. 1991. Project Superintendent Doug Revard 152 hrs. @ $37.53/hr. Tom Nelson Meiisenyer Service Laz Rodriquez Laborer Ralph Jendro III Ralph Jendro Dennis Feel a Allan Kampa Bruce Peterson Henry Rickhoff 4 hrs. @ $45.00/hr. 8 hrs. @ $ 18.00/hr. 21 hrs. @ $32.58/hr. 10 hrs. @ $34.77/hr. 32 hrs. @ $36.80/hr. 112 hrs. @ $30.09/hr. 64 hrs. @ $36.80/hr. 40 hrs. @ $35.13/hr. $5,704.56 180.00 144.00 684.18 347.70 1,177.60 3.370.08 2.355.20 1.405.20 Reimbursable Expenses Blueprinting Copying Postage K/A Equipment Rental K/A Insurance Agency NSP Revard. D. U.S. West UPS Veit Container Corp. Amount Due This Invoice 167.25 518.40 116.84 2.668.74 1,034.00 207.99 79.58 142.74 9.00 1.990 00 $22.303.06 Minneapolis Division 525 Sou(h 8th Street. Minneapolis. MN 55404 Phone: (612) 332-7281 FAX: (612) 332-8739 Equal Opportunity EmplON er m 'm i KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY CONTRACTORS & CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS Invoice #P2tS740 November 30, 1992 APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT aia document g?02 dn$uuciions on revotse $jde) McioNiof wscisTO (OWNCX);City of Crono1335 Brown Road South Crystal Bay, Minnesota PROIECT: 55323 Orono Municipal Facility Orono, Minnesota APPLICATION NO: one PERIODIC: 11/25/92 FROM(CONT^j^^Rj^ Asphalt Corporation P.O. Box 5477 CONTRACT PavinQ VIA iARCF|jEcn^^^ Kroos, Pfister A Assoc. JrqJJct ^nq . Dislribulion lo:□ OWNER □ ARCHITEa □ CONTRAaOR□ .□ Minneapolis, Minn. 55401 CONTRACT DATE: May 11, 1992 CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT O % • C f*? • • • • CHANCE ORDER SUMMARY Change Orders approved in previous months Owner TOTAL Approved this Month i^ate Approved 11/12/92 N jv V mi <ihiiiVirirt TOTALS ADDITIONS 14,398.00 14,398:00 DEDUCTIONS .NeUhapM.lyfih^nKe Orders + 14,398.00 52.675.00 The undersign^ Contractor certifies that to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief the Wbrk covered by this Application for Payment has been completed In accordance with the Contract Documents, that all amounts have been paid by Ihe Contractor for Work for which previous Certificates for Payment were issued and payments received from Ihe Owner, and that current payment sliownCherein is now due. Application is made for Payment, as shown below, in connection with Ihe ConirKl. Continuation Sheet, AIA Document C703, is attached. 1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM........................................S 41,100.00 2. Net change by Change Orders ....................................S 14,398.00 3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (Line 1*2)........................$ 55,498.00 4. TOTAL COMPLnEO & STORED TO DATE.....................S (Column C on C703) 5. RETAINAGE: a. 10 % of Completed Work (Column D + E on C703) b—Q. % of Stored Material (Column F on C703) Total Retainage (Line Sa + 5b or Total in Column I of C703)..................................$ 6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE...............................$ (Line 4 less Line 5 Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT (Line 6 from prior Certificate)..............S 8. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE...........................................$ 9. BALANCE TO FINISH, PLUS RETAINAGE.....................S (Line 3 less Line 6) t 5.267.50 t - 0 - 5,267.50 47.407.50 - 0 - 47,407.50 CONTRACTOR^idwest Asphalt Corporation Stale of: 11 ^ t ^ Subscribed and sworn lo befor Notary Public: My Commission expires: Co.n1 IN COW • MAR. a IM4 ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT In accordance with (he Contract Documents, based on on-site observations and the data comprising the above application, the Architect certifies to the Owner that to the best of the Architect's knowledge, information and belief the Work has progressed as indicated, the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, and (he Contractor is entitled to payment of Ihe AMOUNT CERTIFIED. AMOUNT CERTIFIED.......................................................$______________ (Attach explanation H amount certified differs from the amount applied for.) ARCHITECT: By:Dale: This Certificate is not negotiable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only to Ihe Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance of payment are without prejudice to any rights of Ihe Owner or Contractor under this Contract. AIA DOCUMINT C7V2 • Am.lCAIION AND CERTiriCAlf FOR fAYMtNT • MAY t«l (OITION • AIA* • O t«ll TM AMERICAN INSmUTt OF ARCHIKCTS, 173S NtW YORK AVFNUt, N.W.. WASHINGTON, D.C. »»»G7I2>1IB3 WAniliNn: linlirrnsed phnlocepylng vielatea U.5. co|>yi1qM lawt aiMl It tublKt to legal presecutton. APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT am documcnt C702TOIOWNIW: of o^o„o PROIECT: orono City Hall a Public Worksf»OM ICONT«ACTORb ;^oroct, l.,c CONTRACT FOR: Package No. 9 VIA (ARCHIUCl): r CHANCE ORDER SUMMARY 1 Ctunge Orders approved in previous months by Owner TOTAL ADDITIONS DEDUCTIONS -AppjQ»d.lhi5-Mooih r| wItiAjpproved liOV;; • •1 )99? 1 - *.TOTALS 3rders ...* «.onir«cior ceriiiies inal lo Ihe best ol Ihe Coniractof's knowledge, informalion and belief the Work covered by this Application for Payment has been cornfMelM in accordance with ihc Contract Documents, that all amounts have been paid by ihe Contractor lor Work for which previous Certificates for Payment were issued and payments received from the Owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due. CONTRACTOR: fcnerect, Inc. ■Z.Date:November 20, 1992 ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT In accordaiKe with the Contract Documents, based on on-site observations and the data comprising the above application, the Architect certifies lo the Owner that to the best of the Architect ’s knowledge, information and belief the Work has progressed as indicated, the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, and the Contractor is entitled to payment of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. % ^ OOCOMINT cm • AFrUCAIION AND CIIUmCATI rOR mVMINl ♦ MAY 1961 tOmON • AIA* • 198) THI AMlRiCAN INSTITUTC Of ARCIIITfCtS, 17)5 NIW YORK AVfNUf, N.W. WASHINGTON. DC. MOOS (Inslructions on reverse side) met ONI Of2 mciS APPLICATION NO: 2PERIOD TO: 11/30/92ARCHITECT'S PROIECT NO:Distribution lo:□ OWNER□ ARCHITECT□ CONTRACTOR□□CONTRACT DATE: 7/28/92 Application is made for Payment, as shown below, in connection with the Contract Continuation Sheet, AIA Document C7W, is attached. 1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM......................................S 2. Net change by Change Orders...................................\ 15.145.00 -0- 1.514.50 3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (line 1 ±2).......................% 15.145.00 4. TOTAL COMPLETED A STORED TO DATE...................% 15.145.00 (Column C on G701) 5. RETAINACE: a. 10— % of Completed Work $__1.514.50 (Column D -f E on C#703) b. --% of Stored Material S (Column F on C703) Total Rctainage (Line 5a -t- Sb or Total in Column I of C70J)...................................$ 6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RLTAINAGE...............................$ (Line 4 less Line 5 Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT (line 6 from prior Certificate)..............| 8. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE...........................................f 9. BAUNCE TO FINISH, PLUS RETAINACE................. % (Line 3 less Line 6) Slate ol: Minnesota Subscribed and sworn Notary Public: My Commission exjprr i: 13.630.50 10.840.50 2.790.00 1.514.50 OtMAty Af:wmshingt|n JMv 7f. mr .1992 AMOUNT CERTIFIED.......................................................%______________ (Attach explanation if amount certified differs from the amount applied for.) ARCHITECT: By:Date: This Cerlificale Is not negotiable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only to Ihe Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance of payment are without prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor under this Contract. WARNING: UnllcentMl photocopying vinitttf US copyright tmm and It iub|e€l to Icgtl piotociitlon. C7I2-IM3 ,APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT aia document C702 onsirudions on icvcr$e swo rAcioNior tacisTO (OWNER):PROJECT:APPLICATION NO: /Distribution to:City of Orono Orono City Hall/Police and PERIOD TO:□ OWNER1335 Drown Road South Public Works Buildings □ ARCHITECTCrystal Day, MN 55323 FROM (CONTRACTOR):VIA (ARCHITECT):ARCHITECT'S □ CONTRACTOR□>11Doarman Kroos Pfister and A^:,soc.PROIECT NO: 1124.04 □ CONTRACT FOR: 222 North Second Street Minneapolis, MN 55401 CONTRACT DATE: CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY Change Orders approved in previous months by Owner TOTAL Approved this Month Number Date Approved TOTALS ADDITIONS DEDUCTIONS Net change by Change Orders The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best o( the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief the Wbrk covered by litis Application ior Paymcnl has been completed in accordance with the Contract Oocuments. that all amO(>itts have been paid by llie Contractor for Work for which previous Certificates for Payment were issued and payments received from the Owner, and that current paynteni shown herein is now due. Application is made for Paymcnl. as shown below, in connection witli the Contract. Continuation Sheet, AIA Document G703, is altaclied. 1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM........................................S__■ 2. Net cliinge by Change Orders...................................%--------------------------------- 3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (line t ± 2).........................S 4. TOTAL COMPLETED & STORED TO DATE.....................S . (Column G on G703) 5. RETAINAGE: a. % of Completed Work S (Column D 4* E on C703) b. _% of Stored Material %_________________ (Column F on C703) Total Rclainage (Line 5a F 5b or Total In Column I of C703)...................................%__________________.. 6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE................................S ///, ■??? (Linc 4 less Line S Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT (Line 6 from prior Certificate)..............S___ CONTRACTOR: K)k(ZTH9lt>e By: A# • 000^ • • ------------------ WSHINGTO«C(SSff?*'My Comm. Eipiraa 3-6-R7 8. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE...........................................$___"72/'-^. 9. BALANCE TO FINISH, PLUS RETAINAGE.....................S *7^ (Line 3 less Line 6) Date : // / X y /<t 7— Staleof: fY\‘« r\rv.&^ota_ County of; liJn^kt WxFon. Subscribed and strarn to before me litis AM TK day of fVloV. Notary Public: T^ATiyrlAJ HTljAtax-&F My Commission enpites: ^-5- .w*ia ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT In accordance with the Contract Documents, based on on-site observations and the data comprising the above application, the Architect certifies to llic Owner that to llic IresI of lire Architect's knowledge, information and belief the Work has progressed as indicated, Ihe <|ualily of the Work is in accordance wiilt the Coitlract Documents, and the Contractor is entitled to payment of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. AM DOCUMINT Cm • AmtCAItON A;.'!) ClimfICAU rOR I’AYMINT • MAY t<)ni IDiTION • AIA* • C» lOtl TItC AAMMCAN INSItTUII Of ARCIII1ICIS. IMS NtW YORK AVlNUf. N W„ WASlIINCION. 0 C. lOOM AMOUNT CERTIFIED.......................................................S—---------------------- (Attach explanation if amount ceitified differs from the amount applied ford ARCHITECT: Doarittan Kroos Pfister and Associates By:Dale: This Ccrlificatc Is not negotiable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only lo Ihe Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance of payment arc willioul prejudice tc any rights of the Owner or Contractor under tills Contract. G702-I9t3 WAnuitir* UnMrrntPrl photocofyying vlolbleb U S copyrioht Uwt and Is siibtfct lo Ifgal prosecution. APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATF: FOR PAYMENT ma document G702 onsimciton^ on reverse $wc) »>w-.conio » 2mi.is 'TO (OWNER): PKOJECE: APPIICATION NO; 3 Oistrilnilion in:City of Orono Orono City Ilall/Police and Qowner1335 Drown Road South Public Works Buildings period TO: Nov. 30, ' 920 ARCliiiECTCrystal Day, MN 55323 KCONIRACIOR (ROM (CONI R ACT OK): VIA (ARCIinrCT): ARCIimCT'S D Vohnoutka Roofing & Sheet Metal Co., Doarnian Kroos Pfister and Assoc. PROJECT NO: 1124.04 Q Inc. 222 North Second Street CONTRACT fOR: Roofing & Sheet Metal Minneapolis, MN 55401 CONTRACT DATE: 5/11/92 CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT k tj. ’• ■ Cl lANCE ORDER SUMMARY Cliaiigc Orders approved in previous nionlhs l)y Owner TOTAL IDV!:!' FW. laic Approved m/23/9 ^ \ ••TOTALS ADDITIONS 2,512 8,240 10,752 DEDUCIIONS 9,487 6,333 Application is made for Payment, as shown tretow, in connection willr ihc Conlr.Kl. Cunlinualion SliecI, AlA Duciimcnl G703, is allaihed. 1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM.........................................$ 156,288 _________ 2. Ncl change by Change Orders......................................$___( ^0^8)^ .1. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (line I ± 2).........................$ 151,220 <1. TOTAL COMPLETED & STORED TO DATE.....................% 119.548 (Column G on G7U3) S RETAINAGE: a. _LQ % ol Completed Work $ 11,954 (Column D T E on G7U I) h.------% ol Stored Material S_______2_ 15,820 Net change bv Change Orders f 5.0681 (Column F on C70.I) Tolal Kciainage (Line Sa i Sb or Tolal In Column I ol C703).....................................I 11 » 954 The undersigned Coniraclor cerlilics that to the best ol Ihe Cunitaclor's knowledge, information and belief (lie Work covered by this Application lor Payrncnl has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documents, that all amounis have been (laid by the Contractor (or Work lor which previous Cerlilicales (or Payment were issued and payments received from the Owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due. (i. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE..................................$ 107,594 (Line 4 less Line S Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR 86,633 PAYMENT (line 6 from prior Ccrtificalc)...............%___________ «. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE...............................................$ 20,961 •). OAUNCE TO TINISII, PLUS RETAINAGE.......................% 43.626 (Line 3 less line 6) CON FR ACTOR: D.iU?: NQVGfnber 24# 1992 My Commission^ximci Slate of: C Subscribed and swmii 1o before mo Uils Notary Public: X^ My Commission^xmres: ^LD^UMIOT^ T1J^-|M«ES0TA I ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT In accordance with the Contract Documents, based on on-site ohserv.ilions and Ihe data comprising Ihc above ap|>licalioit, Ihc ArchilcC rerlilies l«) the Owner that to Ihc best ol Ihc Archilecl's knowledge, information and bcliel the Work has progressed as iniliialed, the t|ualily of the Work Is in accordance with the Contract Doaiincnis, and Ihe Coniraclor is entitled to payment of the AMOUNT CLKIini.D. MyCemmltslonEiplm l,t». i, iC33 AMOUNT cmiriri)....................... ...........« (At(nch CKfthnntinn H amntinl ccilificd diffets (totn the amount appfrer/ for.l AKCIIIIEC1: Doartnan K luos Plister and Associates lly:Dale: I his Ccilificatc is not negotiable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only to Ihc Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acccpiancc of payment are without prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Coniraclor under tliis Contract. AlA IHKUMCNT C»« • APPIICAIION AND CtRIiriCAU lOR rAVKMNt • MAY IVRl lOIMON • AlA' • « IW» IIM AANRMVtN INSIIIUtl Ut ARCIIIItCtS, IDS NIW YORK AVIMUI. NW. VVASIIINGION. It C. IinVi G702 I9I3 ♦•»*»1»TTMf' M.dir filiAfnrn|r,'fitn vlr»fn1*R U 5 mpyjloM «l»il N ^tihlecl to leqnl |iro«^CIillor9. APPLICATION AND CERTIFiCATE FOR PAYMENT AIA document C702 (instructions on reverse side) mxON(or;imiKTO (OWNER): C,ty C ( PROJECT: C,>-y H/t-UL 9*s,J APPLICATION NO:u/o.-Ars OrrsT^c PERIOD TO: ^i/^rAa FROM (CONTRACTOR): VIA (ARCHITECT): , . nr * CHOO S U,^^oo/ A7^ >'«rC)9Z ^ CONTRACT FOR; ^ y^TVc^/ ► /•/j«c .ARCHITECT'5 PROJECT NO: Distribution to:□ OWNER □ ARCHITECT □ CONTRACTOR□□ CONTRACT DATE; r/i, /fj ^ CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT CHANCE ORDER SUMMARY Change Orders approved in previous months by Owner TOTAL ADDITIONS DEDUCTIONS s^P^PYPil l»lja^nth •?c.co pSL^ri.CO Number ’■•Date Approved 1 • • *». . '•.-.I... totals 9990.0 O C Net change by Change Orders , CO 1T9H.OO The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief ^he Work covered by this Application for Payment has been completed In accordance with the Contract Documents, that all amounts have been paid by the Contractor for Work for which previous Certificates for Payment were issued and payments received from the Owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due. CONTRACTOR: Jh/J c./tu, U< • Date: Application is made lor Payment, as shown below, in connection with the Contract. Continuation Sheet, AIA Document CTU, is attached. 1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM......................................$ *00 2. Net change by Change Orders...................................| 9-9-^« C<Pi^ 3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (Line 1 ±2)......................$ 9^*^C. OQ 4. TOTAL COMPLnED & STORED TO DATE...................$ S 9 H 0,00 (Column C on C703) 5. RHAINAGE: a. % of Completed Work $ (Column D -f E on C703) b. _% of Stored Material $________^ (Column F on C703) Total Retainage (Line 5a + Sb or Total in Column I of C703)...................................$ ____ 6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE................................$ ,5 3 ,00 (Line 4 less Line 5 Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR __ PAYMENT (Line 6 from prior Certificate)..............$ / 7 8. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE...........................................$ 3 aTO 9. BALANCE TO FINISH, PLUS RHAINAGE.....................S _____(Line 3 less Line 6)________ Slate of: ^ Subscribed and.sw^n to before me t Notary PublJerC/^^/ My CommfMiop>)(^es: y / . / ST9Y. Oo •Copi\tyA>fcvv>AP^• - filQYJiCWi ’M H'LCemmir'"*n E*r';t I!*''. IS. I' ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT In accordance with the Contract Documents, based on on-$iic observations and the data comprising the above application, the Architect certifies to the Owner that to the best of the Architects knowledge, information and belief the Work has progressed as Inc .ated, the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, and the Contraaor is entitled to payment of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. AMOUI^P c IrTIFIED ..............................wvwwWwvvVV'>i''vvv'x»v<-‘' '• (Attach explanation if amount certified differs from the amount applied fb>) ARCHITECT: By:Dale: This Certificate is not iiegotiabic. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only to the Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance of payment are without prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor under this Contract. AIA OOCUM0IV cm • APPLICATION ANO CERTIflCATt fOR PAYMENT • MAY 1903 fOITION • AIA» • O 19§3 ▼Hf IT* Of AOf“M1TrF^< S-YC VOV* sl C c ♦••• • *•* ‘riTc r> r» Application and Certificate for Payment (substitute for AIA Document G702) Application No. : Application Date: Period To: La Force Job No.: 03 11/20/92 11/25/92 -.4151 Project Name: CITY HALL/PUBLIC WORKS FAC TO: KRAUS ANDERSON BLDG DIV. 2500 MINNEHAHA AV. MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55404 FROM: LA FORCE HARDWARE 6 MFG. P.O. BOX 10068 GREEN BAY. WI 54307-0068 CO. TRADE PAYMENT BREAKDOWN IS ATTACHED. 1. Original Contract Sum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2. Net Change by Change Orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 3. Contract Sum to Date (line 1 + 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S Jl*519.00 4. Total Completed ft Stored to Date (column G) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 15,654.00 5. Retninage: a. lO.OOZ of completed work (column D + E) ................ $ 1,565.40 b. lO.OOZ of Material Stored (column F) . . . . . . . S -00 Total Retainage (line 5a + 5b; or total column I) . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1.565.40 6. Total Earned Less Retainage (line 4-5 totals) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. Less Previous Certificates for Payment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 6,030.00 (line 6 from prior certificates) ^ 8. Current Payment Due . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6.058.60 9. Balance to Finish, Pluj Retainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 ^/,4jo.4u (line 3 less line 6) The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief the Work covered by this Application for payment has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documents, that all amounts have been paid by the Contractor for Work for which previous Certificates for Payment were issued and payments received from the Owner, and that curren^^yment shown herein is now due. CONTRACTOR: LA FORCE HARDWARE & MFG. CO. By:^j^^>C^ : 11/20/92 State of: Wisconsin County of: Brown c^f)/xjy^rv%t 19 Co Subscribed and sw<^n to^before t^ - - - day of Y Notary Public: / t^nn 07^^ - I ”7 Commission expires: / 3h5l^lCKl<he quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, and the Contractor is entitled to payment of the AMOUNT CERTIFIiD. NQM)8hT ISS^IFIED $ __By:Date: APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT ma document G702 unsifuciions on reverse $we)met ONI Of ImM TO COWNtRI:Fdfouo APPLICATION NO CO FROM (CONTRACTOR):VIA (ARCHITtCT): -YU u-\ PtRIOD TO: p - II- ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: I OlsUibulion to: □ OWNER D ARCHITEa □ CONTRAaOR□□ CONTRACT FOR: 6fUA\Ot\CONTRACT DATE: CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT CHANCE ORDER SUMMARY Change Orders approved in previous months by Owner TOTAL r.-(need ihi% Mpiyli Number NoV ISpBtfr.-A Date Approved \0 - I,***m. CjQ:n[??:t^y TOTALS ADDITIONS \A o**7 DEDUCTIONS I Net change by Change Orders \ I Applicatloit is made lor Payment, as shown below, in connection with the Contract. Conlinuallon Sheet, AIA Document C703, is attached. 1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM..................................... 2. Net change by Change Orders................................ 3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (Line 1 ± 2)..................... 4. TOTAL COMPLETED & STOkED TO DATE................. (Column C on C703) 5. RETAINACE: ^ “2_ri* a. AS. % o( Completed Work S *C»<^ (Column D 4- E on C703) b. _% of Stored Material S______________ The undersigned Contractor certilies that to the best ol the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief the Work covered by this Application lor Payment has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documents, that alt amounts have been paid by the Contractor (or Work (or which previous Certificates (or Payment were issued and payments received from the Owner, and that current payment shown herein is riow due. CONTRKCIOR: " (Column F on C703) Total Relainage (Line Sa -f Sb or Total in Coiomn I of G703)..................................$ 6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINACE...............................S (Line 4 less Line S Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES TOR PAYMENT (Line 6 from prior Certificate)..............S 0. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE...........................................S 9. BALANCE TO FINISH, PLUS RETAINACE....................$ (Line 3 less Line 6) it-41 ’lu g o '. By: f Slate of: Subscribed and s^rn lo before Notary Public: VittXVJL-M. My Commission expires;.^ County of: 4^\t«^]UQjuuO i” day of Vlo\r» ^ ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT In accordance with (he Contract Documents, based oi« on-site observations and the data comprising the above application, the Architect certifies to (he Owner (hat to (he best of the Architect’s knowledge, information and belief (he Work has progressed as indicated, (he quality of the Work is in accordance with (he Contract Documents, and (i.o Contractor is entitled lo payment ol the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. AMOUNT CERTIFIED......................................................$______________ fA((ac/> eMplanalion If amount certified differs from the amount applied for.) ARCHITECT: tifi 2?. Dy;Date: This Certificate is not negoliah!<*. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only lo the Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance of ^ymenl are wilhoul prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor under (his Coniracl. AIA oocUAtiNi cm• ArrucAiioN and uriukmi ma immini • k «ay i<mj iuiuon • aia * • ** ••wn or ARrmiirrs im niw vork Avtmu nw wASMiwnroN nr rnnof. APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT aia document C702 unsuuciions on reverse sido rfctwioifO lOWN£Rl:rROM (CONTRACTOR): CONTRACT TOR; I PKOIECT:' ,r-’Vi-.::>i lo I-lAorVIA (ARCHITECT):PERIOD TO: 11 ^(•'S”2^ARCHITECT’S PROJECT NO: Disuibullon to:□ OWNER□ ARCHITECTD CONTRACTOR□□ t CONTRACT DATE: CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT CHANCE ORDER SUMMARY Chartge Orders approved in previous months by Owner total ADDIIIONS DTDUCTtONS Approved this Montp \Ao'^ • Number \ Dl.iv Dale Ap.iroved \0 - L’S • •vi.i TOTALS \ AoV jhAUithilHg^ by Change* Orders \ A Applientiun is made (or Payment, as shown below. In conneOion wiRi the Conliacl. Cori4iiiua(ion SliccI, AIA Document C703, is attached. 1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SOM........................................% t-* 2. Net change by Change Orders.....................................} 3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (Line 1 ± 2)...................... 4. TOTAL COMPLETED A STORED 10 DATE.................. (Column C on C70J) 5. RCTAINAGE: a. IQ. % of Completed Work S (Column D -t- E on G703) b. _% of Stored Material S_______________ S « 1 I " (Column F on C703) Tolal Rctainage (Line Sa r Sb or Total in Column I of C703)'Vh'b<h The undersigned Contractor certilics that to Ihc best of the Coniractor’s knowledge, inlormation and belief the Work covered by this Applicalion lor Payment has been cumplelcd in accordance with the Contract Documents, that «ill amounts have been paid by tlic Contractor for Work for which picvious Ceilificates lor Payment were issued and p.iyments received Ironi the Owner, and lh.il ciinent p.iymeni shown herein is now due. CONT Dale: 6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE.................................$ .U \ (Line 4 less Line 5 Tolal) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT (Line 6 from prior Certificate)............... 0. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE..............................................t 9. BALANCE TO FINISH, PLUS RETAINAGE......................$ (line 3 less Line 6) Stale of; County of: Subscribed andworn to before rpe (_^ Notary Public:jjyx)r.UMy Commislioii c«|jlr«: I ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT In accorda ice with the Contrac* Documents, based on on site observations and the data comprising the above application, the Architect cerlilies to the Owner that to tlie best of llie Archileers knowledge, information and belief the Work has progressed as indicated, the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, and the Contractor is entitled to payment of the AMOUNT CLKTlftLD. AMOUNT CERTIFIED...................................................... (Aif.ic/i exphnaiion if amount certified differs from l/i ARCHITECT: C." By:Dale: This Certificate is not negotiable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only lo Ihe Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance of payment are withoul prejudice lo any rights of the Owner or Contractor under this ConIrKl. AiAOOCUMiNt crai* ArmcAiioN ANpriHmiTAii roR taymimi • a«ay (•mi inmoN*AiA ‘ *r i<mi iin AAHRiCAN nniiiuii ui ARCiiiucis. iris mw vork avinui. nw. wASiiiNcrnN. oc. rooM C7V2-I9B3 APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT aia document C702 onsimciions on rcvetse side»APPLICATION NO: 2PERIOD TO: 11/30/92 PACt ONt Of n\ctsTO (OWNER):City of Orono 1335 Drown Road South Crystal Day, MN 55323 FROM (CONTRACTOR): ^ U /»Ja/ PROIECT:Orono City Hall/Police and Public Works Buildings CONTRACT FOR: CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT VIA (ARCHITECT): ARCIIITECrS Doarman Kroos Pfister and Assoc. PROIECT NO: 1124.04 222 North Second Street Minneapolis r MN 55401 CONTRACT DATE: Ditliibuliun to:□ OWNER□ ARCHITECT□ CONTRACTOR□□ Application is made lor Payment, as $)>own below, in connection with tire Contract. Continuation Sheet, AIA Document C703, is attached. CHANCE ORDER SUMMARY Cliange Orders approved in previous montiss by Owner TOTAL Approved this Month one 11/2/92 li*V , ^ TOTALS ‘ ri^t^ATM»Qftftl>v:<q^nge Orders ADDITIONS DEDUCTIONS (-3,463.00) 1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM......................................'hnT 2. Net change by Change Orders...................................^ ?qV nn 3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (Line 1 ±2).......................\ ^gf tijlL_■ ^ ^ m ■ V ■ pv ■ ■ w w • ^ w • • •• ^ #■ ^ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ A. TOTAL COMPLETED & STORED TO DATE...................$ 55,011.00 (Column G on C703) 5. RETAINAGE: . a. IL % of Completed Work S 5,501.10 (Column D + E on C703) b. _% of Stored Material S---------------—— . fc.p. * « ■■■ ■. ■ ■■ - | Tl»e utsdersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief the Work covered by this Application for Payment has bce«i a____■ !__________i___ ...ItU al.,» 0/%«-c..M*aratC lh!«l all amOlinU HavO hP(!fl iniurniBiiuii anu r.............— compleiccl in accordance wUh llic Contract Documents, that all amounts have been paid by the Contractor for Work for which previous Certificates lor Payment were issued and payments received from the Owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due. (Column F on C703) Total Rctainagc (Line Sa + 5b or 5 501 10 Total In Column I of C703)...................................% to' gna'~gn‘ 6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE...............................% ' * - - (Line A less Line S Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT (Line 6 from prior Cerlificale)................1 in Ha 7d 0. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE.............................................» ocSl? (n 9. BALANCE TO FINISH, PLUS RETAINAGE........................$ ^3# 7/Z .i_U (Line 3 less Line 6)___________________ CONTRACTOR: Hoffer's, Inc. f)y;. George N 10/19/92 Stale Subscribed and>worn to belon Notary Public] My Commission expires.^ ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT in accordance with the Contract Documents, based on on-site obs..i vations and the data comprising the above application, the Architect certifies to the Owner that to Ihc best o( the Architect's knowledge, information and belief the Work has progressed as indicated, the quality of the Work is in accord.ince with the Contract Documents, and the Contractor is entitled to payment of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. AMOUNT CERTIFIED I. PUaUC-IMMESOTR HENNEPM COUNTY m V* (Allacfi cxptanalion it amoiinl ctrtUied diffcis front the amount applivU lotj ARCHITECT: Doarman Kroos Pfister and Associates fly:Dale: This Cerlilicate is not negotiable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only to llte Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance of payment are without prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor under this Contract. AIA IKKUMINI Ciai • AtTIICAUON AND OKIIf ICAIt l()« mVMtNI • AtAV IWJ lOIIION • AIA‘ ’ Tm AMIRICAN INSIIIUII Of AKatlHClS. 17IS NIW VOMK AVlNUt, t W.. WASDINCtON. DC. 10006 G7I3-1M3 !• • >\|*|*l.lCATION ANO CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT AIA DOCUMINF C702 rM:inNtiif fM;n,Uuction< on rcvetse side) PUCATION NO: 2riOD TO: 11/30/92RCiiincrs ROItCTNO: 1124.PACt ONt OI IWCtSDisUibullon lo;□ OWNtR□ ARCHIUCT□ CONTRACTOR□ aONTRACT DATE:_______.. in con«c.lo« .•« .C7.1, U .UKhCKl, ggW.3.463JHU *7 <,28 2.^................................. .0,0to TO ..............................* ■, - 5.501.10ifk 9 ———------------ . 5,501.10 *-nr;5py:w FOR . 18,961.2^ CcHiticatel...........» "in. 548.....■I'lrmrio TAINACC ______Date: ---------------------- , ,hc AMOUNl aniHIO G7tl-1R*3 iV ' UMinVNlRl: cityoCOrono• 1335 Brown Rd. S.Crystal Bay, Minn. 55323 PROItC!: ptibUc I'torksOrono, Minn.FROM ICUNIRAC10R):CONIRAC1 FOR:Mnlcaliy, Inc.VIA (ARCnillCF):Wifi niviRinnft FI14 A ?0 Drvugill & EIFS K-A t^ls 525 S. 8th St, Minn.55404 AmiCAIIONNO: 3I’lRIODIO: 11/30/92ARnilHCF‘5 rROIlCI NO:CONIRACt t)AIC:Ohlilhullon li>: IJFAVNIR LIARnillFCF tl CONIRACIOR1:1tlCONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION TOR PAYMENTCHANGE ORUIR SUMMARYChaiiRe Uiilcrf appiovrtf In previous montlis liy OwnerlOIAl AUDI HONS DIUUCIK3NSA|ipinvctl .iRIt.l^lfinlliMumlicri-.’/ Appriivcil•iOV;■>'1.03?• • . .n; . TOtAISNeCiUanK iJlriKiiGItitnRe Utilctslife iimlrrilf^ If't Contfuctor crtllflet fliil lo Ihc hcM uf the CoMlrac im'f linowtc<l|;(*, liiloimalito) an J belief the Wntk cuveteti by *lil« A|i|fllcall«m fur Paymenl Inc lieeti ctitftpleleif In accoitlatice wllli Ilie Conifatl !>tictimefili» lint all atimiiiilc liave been nalii by the Conltacbir fnr Woilc icir which ptevlmic Cerlinialci for Paymcnl were Icsiieii aticf iiaymeiilf tecelvecl from the Owner, anti tint tiirrenl |iaymeiil cimwit lieieln It now due. CUNIRACIOR:Milcahy, Tnc. DMc: ARCHITECrS CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT tn accfitdance with the Coiiltacl iTociimentf. Iiacetl cm cm*ille tih.cervallom anil the data €om|vrUln|t the above apiillcalhm. the Aichllrct t erllflec to the Ownrt Ilia! lo llie beat Ilf the Atchilfct's knciwleclftc# Infotmallon and belief Ihe Work Inc pmijtecccd as Intllcaletl, the finality of Ibe Work 1% In accordan(e%vllb Ibr roniracf l)ucuincnl!t, anil Hie Conltaclor li enlillcd lo paymenl of Ibe AMUUNI CtRllf IIU. Appllcallmi U made lor Paymenl, aa nbo%vn belnw. In connecllon wllli Ibe Conlrac t Coollnuallfin Shceb AM Document C7f3, If altaclied,I. ORICINAl CONFRACf SUM....................................I 165|000.00------------1. Net cFiangc f>y ClianRe Otifcft .................................t , ^?iVsQ*^ , .i - .3. CONTRACT SUAT TO DATI fl liie t « 2).....................t l?.7t6?SiSQ------------4. TOTAl COMPltTIt) fl. STORIU TO I9ATI..................t 147.»31fli.QQ------------ICitlimm C till Ci70T|5. REFAINAC;tta.___% III Cnni|tli>l('«l WinkICiiluiim I) T I <m (.7111) It.___% ol SliifrtI A(.ilcilal t%14,781.00Wioliimn F on G70))Tiilal Rclaina|ie (I liit> 5a I Sit nrTitlnl lit Cnliimn I ol 0701).....................................t IA^7R1 fYTk. TOTAl EARNED tfSS RITAINAGE..................................t 133,029.00(l ine 4 lt*.<i line 5 Total) 7. ItSS PREVIOUS CtRTiriCATIS TOR PAYMENT (I Ine f frnm prior Cerllllcale)...............t 110.678.00 0. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE...............................................I - 77 , IS) .flf) 9. BAIANCE TO TINISII. PIUS RETAINACE.......................t 44.591.00 ______(line 3 leo line 6) _______________________________________ SiMeiil: Minnesota Cuuniy ul: Vfeishington Stilitcrlltrtl ai^Ti^rn lo lielorc me llih 23rde- Niilaiy Piililir: My Ciiniinistlitil^aplTcf:kl/v m JEMMNN M. 8UJSS fUaiig^MMNESOTA nSiwuMiy AMOUNT CERTirilD (AfMrli r»pl.mjf(nn H ammmi cerOOetF ditfets Ironi llie antoiml appllei^ For.) ARCHIUCT: lly:Dale: lItU (>rll(ii.ali* It Mill nep.ollalilr. llie AMOUNT riRlirilD li payalilr only In lltc Ctinlr.li lor naiiirtl lii iriii. Iimi.iiu p. paymenl anil at i epianre ol p.iymrnl are Tvilhriiil pre|inllie lo any rl|{lilt til llie Owner or Conlt.iilor tintirr llili ( onitatl. . AiApOiuauNl <;»!• Arnu AiiiiM anii i :tiMit aii iur lAttiiNi • mav i'mmumhin * aia * * < i-mi lilt AMianAN INSIIIUII Ol AlUKIMt 11. 1711 MOV VniR AVINOI. MW. WAMIINiaoN. Itf. Rimi. WAniltNO; Unllctnt.a phfliotopvin, .tol.l.a II9 CfTy>'<|t<l Inn I. l« t.,.1 G79ItM.1 • » ’ *tt t* •* (liitliiMH oik nil trvrr^e 0(tp| ncirioMir ricitAmiCAMON NU: 3man) lo: n/30/92ARC HittersPRcmCI NO:CONI RAC! HAIt:Diililliullon lo:UOWNIRLIARrilllfCfClCONIRAriORt:itl•III, 44 shown below, in connrcHon wllli llie Conliid. iimcnt G793, Is alUtlird.M............................. 1 165,000.00let!.............................t 12.6^0.00IIloe I ♦ 21................... 1 177.620.00Rto 10 DAii.............f i47.aio.nniiii( iII■I %14,781.00 113.1,029.00 prior CeillKcalel ................i 110.678.00 ..................................S-22»35tUQa .................t_44.591.nn Cotiniy of: Vlashlngtoii »r« me llils 23rd^----llOKJlUil JEANANN II81USSwm&mmoifh Momnr . trtmrd diffeia from rrte tnimint applied for. I -------------------------------Hale: Me. the AMOlINt riRlirill) If payaWp .1111 r. payment anil ai«e|>lanr e of paymeni are saiihrmt irwiier or l.onliailor oniter Ihh ( oniratl. MftlAfl. G201.f!H.1 APPLICAkTION AND CERTIFIOATE FOR PAYIN^ENT AIA document G702 Unslrucliuns on reverse side) mciONtor wc;isTO (OWNER): City of Orono1335 Brown Road So.PROfECT: Orono City Hall and Public Works APPLICATION NO;1 Distribution to: □ OWNERCrystal Bay, MN 55323 PIRIODIO: 11/30/92 □ ARCHITECT□ CONTRACTORFROM (CONTRACTOR): Dale Tile Company4825 France Ave. No. Minneapolis, MN 55429 CONTRACT FOR: Ceramic Tile VIA (ARCHIIECT): Boarman and Assoc.ARCMIIECT’S PROJECT NO:CONTRACT DATE:7/28/92 □□CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENTCHANCE ORDER SUMMARYChange Orders .ipproved in previous months by OwnerTOTAL ADDITIONS DEDUCTIONSApproved this Month 1,726.00 Number Dale .Approved 1 11/12/92 TOTALS 1.726.00 Nel change by Change Orders 1,726.00 The undersigned Coniraclor certifies that to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief the Work covered by this Application lor Payment has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documents, that all amounts have been paid by the Coniraclor for Work for which previous Certificates fur Payment wcr.. issued and payments received from the Owner, and that current paymeni shown herein is now due. CONfRACIOR: Dale Tile Company Application is made fur Paymeni, as shown below, in connection with the Contract. Continuation Sheet, AIA Document C703, is attached.1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM...........................................$ 21,292.002. Nel change by Change Orders .......................................S 1,726.00 _____3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (line 1 ± 2)........................$ 23,018.004. TOTAL COMPLETED & STORED TO DATE.......................$ 15,550.00(Column G on (i7(H|5. RETAINACE;a. _15. % of Completed Work $ 1,555.00______ (Column D 4- E on C703) b. _% of Stored Material 1_________________ (Column F on C703) Total Relainage (line 5a 4 5b or Total in Column I of C703).....................................$ b. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINACE.................................S (Line 4 less Line 5 Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT (line 6 from prior Certificale)...............$ 8. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE..............................................$ 9. BALANCE TO FINISH, PLUS RETAINACE......................$ (Line 3 less line 6) 1,555.00 13,995.00 -0- 13,995.00 9,023.00 St.ileof: Subscribed and swiirn lo before }Wk ,19^VL Dale ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT In accordance with the Contract Documents, based on on-site observations and lire data comprising the above application, the Architect certifies to the Owner that to the best ol Hic Architect's knowledge, information and belief the Work lias progressed as indicated, the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, and the Contractor is cnlillcd to payment ol the AMOUN1 CERliriED. :>uD$criuca ana svwtrn lo ueiore . ______■,-wuwrf" - « MyCommulL^i^ ^y^yvvv^^^ AMOUNT CERTIFIED...........................................................%_______________ fAffa '*< ' xplanation if amount certified diffeis from the amount applied ford AR (liltCT: By:Dale: Ibis Certificate is not negotiable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIIO is payable only lo the Coniraclor named herein. Issuance, p.iymcnl and acceptance of paymeni are wiihuul prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Coniraclor under this Contract. AIAIIOCOMINI C7tl» AmiCAIION ANDCIKIIIK All lOH IVWMINI • NiAY r«» r.DIIION • AIA" • *■ I'llIJ tin AMIRICAN INSIIIUIl Of AROIIIICIS, 1715 NIW YORK AVINUI, N W.. WASHINCION. D.C. 21I0W,C7t2*l9t3 WAnNItIO: UnllrroRfid pholoron>l»Tq vlolnlm U S. cnpyrlqhl Inm imd 1r Riii»|rr! !o Ipha I proRrculton. AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT aia document C702:h 0th Street )lis, MN 55404 1 Ly Ha 1 I & PUD 11C Works PRO)EC^gi„gjgg - Orono, Minnesota (Inslruclions on reverse side)irie met ONI or PncisAPPLICATION NO: PERIOD Tol 30/92jdale, Inc., Mpls.. MN 55426 KrooS.Pfister & Associates ARCHITECT'S PROIECT NO:4059CONTRACT DATE:®®/^ ^Oisiribution to:□ OWNER□ ARCHITECT□ CONTRACTOR□OR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT Application is made lor Payment, as shown below. In connection with the Contract. Continuation Sheet, AIA Document C703, is attached.MARY 1ed in wncrTOTAL ADDITIONS DEDUCTIONS)[proved il ;)'-^tlH)TALS e Orders 1 1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM......................................%2. Net change by Change Orders..................................>24.894.000.003. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (Line 1 ± 2)......................S-------* Snn * nn4. TOTAL COMPLETED A STORED TO DATE...................S-------1 i , UUU .UU(Column C on G703)5. RHAINAGE:jJ.O __% o( Completed Work S —T , 700 .00 -------(Column D + E on C703) lj.9__% ol Stored Material S------------9,* QQ------ 1.700.00 actor cerfiiics inai lo me oesi imr the Work covered by this Applicalion lor Payment has been ce with the Contract Documents, that all amounts have been lor Work (or which previous Cerlilicales lor Payment were cceived (rom the Owner, and that current payment shown ison & Youngdale, Inc. (Column F on C703) Total Rctainage (Line 5a -F Sb or Total in Column I ol C703)..................................i <ann nn 6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE...............................S------1 5 t 300 ■ Ott. (Line 4 less Line 5 Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT (Line 6 Irom prior Certilicate)..............S------ onft ft'n 8. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE............................................>------ ogoi nn 9. BALANCE TO FINISH, PLUS RETAINAGE.......................S 9.594.00 (line 3 less line 6)-----Minnesota:- State of: Date: 11/23/92 Subscribed and^J^rn ^ ^»ore me this^^^^^^^^^^^^ Notary PublicV.y^a^M«,/f.Mt42^ : MELISSA S. E. EDWINS ! My Commission expires: S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT • Contract Documents, based on on-site observations and the iove application, the Architect certilies lo Ihe Owner thal lo the inowlcdge, information and belief the Work has progressed as )(the Work Is in accordance with the Contract Documcnis, and [led lo payment of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. AMOUNT CERTIFIED....................... ^ , (Attach cf(pl3naUon if amount certih'ecMiMwMwilVilMfeWMttAMMllMlMMiMtv F.-OTARV PVJGUC • MWNSCOT.I li^ ARCHITECT. Dale: This Certificate Is not negotiable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only to the Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance ol payment are without prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor under this Contract. t->i*,it • G7tn-19«3 ... I I- PPLICATIC’.OM:0NTRAC1Ungeohdef•angi Orders I tMtdous tnottSTOTALivoveuYils rnNNbtr ■t change byC <oundsrsignc« 'jmulionarKf inplitadinac •klbyttwCon •usdwtdpap rsbiisnowdi RCHITE( accvdance i •la comptfslti 'Slot fit IkaiHLtftei •iCcnlr actor 4 iangiOrd«rtapproMd pi«aou» inonllw by Owner ADOmONS DEDUCIIONSTOTALto SO1 iivdired IHs montliHnb«r Dale Approved17-22-S2 t3.270 soh 2 X SO so • 3 X SO so 1 ^X SO SO 6 X 1 •TOTALS $3,278 SO €$OTA CATION AND CFRI lFICAIt FOK PAYMLNI AIA UULUMLNi L»/U^ (Insituclions on reverse side) iwct ONt o> 3 iwu sAPPLICATION K^O: 7TO (OWNER):City of Orono 1335 Drown Road South Crystal Bay, MN 55323 EROM (CONTRACTOR):Allied Mechanical Systems340 Michigan St., Hutchinson, MN 55350CONTRACT FOR: Mechanical Work PROIECT:Orono City llall/Police andPublic Works Buildings PERIOD TO: 11-30-92VIA (ARCHITECT); ARCHITECT'SBoarman Kroos Pfister and Assoc. PROIECT NO: 1124.04 222 North Second StreetMinneapolis, MN 55401 CONTRACT DATE:Oisiribulion (o:□ OWNER□ ARCHITECT□ CONTRAaOR□□CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT 0- CHANCE ORDER SUMMARYChange Orders approved in previous months by OwnerTOTAL ADDITIONS DEDUCTIONS^WiinibbV ■*-0j(le ApprovedO p.)•1992 ir....<;nn rrytiJTgaV TOTALS Net change by Change Orders (8,086.71) information and belief the Work covered by this Applicalion for Payment has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documenls. dial ail amounts have been paid by the Conlraclor lor Work (or which previous Certificales lor Payment were issued and payments received (rom the Owner, and that current paymenl shown herein is now due. CONTRACTOR: Allied Mechanical Systems of Hutchinson, Inc. -----------------D.1IC: 11~2Q zl9.2 Application is made lor Payment, as shown below. In connection wilh Ihe Contract. Continuation Sheet, AIA Document C703, is allached.1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM......................................S 390|000.Q0 -----------2. Net cliange by Change Orders..................................$ —-(8jQ86i7 1) , —3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (Line 1*2)......................$ 381 >913.29---------4. TOTAL COMPLETED & STORED TO DATE...................t .3.39,017.29---------(Column C on C703)5. RETAINACE:a. 10 - % of Completed Work I _,.32,,185iQQ ^(Column D + E on C703)b. 10 - % o( Stored Material $-----1,737.00------ (Column F on C703) Total Reiainage (Line Sa \ 5b or q-a nn Total in Column I of C703)...................................S---------J» 6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINACE...............................$ 305,115.29 -------- (Line 4 less Line S Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT (line 6 from prior Cerllficale)..............$ ^ 0. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE...........................................$------iTlSAft?? (Line 3 less Line 6)____________________ lesota irn/lo be/ore Oy: Stale o(: HI1 Subscribed and Notary Public: My Commissloi/ eaplrcsj^" 643-97 County o(: McLeod hisv - 20th*‘»''^’'day ‘oLir/v>\HQ«y,v..,]992 BECKY OSTLIE NOIAHY public . MMNESOTA McLEOD COUNTV ARCHITECT'S (fERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT .rrTT/vyr t r t v 111 ■ ■ i In accordance with the Conlracl Oocumcnis, b.i$ed on on-site observations and the ARCHITECT: Boarman KrooS Pflsterand Associakes data comprising the above application, the Archllcct ccrlilies to the Owner that to the best ol the Architect's knowledge, information and belie! Ihe Work has progressed as By: ______________________________________Dale: . indic.Tted. the t|uality of the Work is in accordance wilh Ihe Coniraci Documenls, .-tnd , cerilficale is not negotiable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED Is payable only to (he the Conlraclor is cniiticd to payment ol Ihe AMOUNT CERTIFIED. Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance of paymenl are wllhool . .. I I ^________________ ill9W^*Wl •T’m^ew**** ^ ^ ^ ^ ^-------- prc|udicc lo any rights ol Ihe Owner or Conlraclor under (his Coniraci. AIA UOCUMINT CrOl • Al’I'llCATION A»:0 CtRTIFICAlt f OR fAYMlNV • MAY tOOl (DIIION • AIA' • O 19M lilt AAUKKAN INSmUn Of ARCIItTlCTS. 1/JS NtW YORK AVINUI, N.W.. WASMINCTON. 0 C. 20006 WAntllrlO C702.19I3 l|nlletn.ed phoioeopying vtolal.* U S. copyright t«w, and It lubjcel to tegtl proiteutlorr. US lo the lihoui MM3 APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT AIA document C702 (instructions on reverse side) wet OHI Of fims^ .^m. A * A & ■ A. « M MM ^ A m S ^ > AT .^K. *TO (OWNER): City o£ Orono1335 Brown Road South Crystal Bay, MN 55323 PROIECT: City Hall & Public Works Carage - Orono, MN APPLICATION NO: Six PERIOD TO; 11/30/92. Gaphart Electric Co«« IncA/IA (ARCHITECT): Boannan, Kroos« PEister 3600 LaBore Road & AssociatesSt. Paul, MN 55110 222 North Second StreetCONTRACT FOR: Electrical Mtnae.polls, HH 55401 ARCHITECTS PROJECT NO:Distribution to:□ OWNERO ARCHITECT O CONTRACTOR Q□CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENTChange Orders approved in previous months by OwnerTOTALtV.ll »ppt6yW3thti^nth Number | I^td Approved ^^|^)V#y^ 1f9?i/92 ADDITIONS DEDUtniONS (9,267.00) (9.267.00) Net change by Change Orders______________________________ The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of the Contractor s knwWge. information and belief the Work covered by this Application for Payment has been comoieted in accordance with 'he Contract Documents, that all amounts have been paid by the Contractor for Work for which previous Certificates for Payment were issued and payments received from the Owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due. CONTRACTOR: Gephart Electric Co., Inc. Date:11/14/92 ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT best of the Architect's knowledge, information and belief the Work has progressed as Indicated, the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, and the Contractor is entitled to payment ol the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. CONTRACT DATE:Application is made lor Payment, as shown below. In connection with the Contract. Continuation Sheet, AIA Document GTtO, is atUched.« 279.400.001. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM......................................S------ —2. Net change by Change Orders...................................*------l9iZP/.,*fltLLromwJr SOM io dais am. 1.2,.............s4. TOTAL COMPlEllO Br STORED TO DATE.................%(Column G on G703) 5. RCTAINACE: a____% of Completed Work $ 21 ,060._30— (Column D + E on C703) b____% of Stored Material 0.00 21.060.30 (Column F on C703) Total Retainage (Line Sa 5b or Total in Column I of C703)...................................5 ——— ^. __ 6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RHAINAGE.............................* — (Line 4 less Line S Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT (Line 6 from prior Certificate)..............$ — * 8. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE...........................................5------SQO 30 9. BAIANa TO FINISH, PLUS RETAINAGE.....................S (line 3 less Lirie 6) Slate of: Minneso Subscribed and swor Notary Public: My Commission exp AMOUNT CERTIFIED m ‘V ill'ifiR rwvirri* TON COUN «ekM t>t2. oveaber ,}9 92 (Attach explanation if amount certified differs from the amount ^pplied^r.l ARCHITECT: This Certificate is not negotiable. The AMOU n Tc ERTIFIID is payable only to th- Contractor named herein Issuance, payment and accepianceof prejudice lo anv righls of the Owner or Contractor under this Contract. Dale: APPlTO (OWFROM (<CONTRcor ;-.r CHANChan]prevliApprtNumI Net • The ui inforn comp paid I issuer hereii CON- Inao data I best* indie the( AMI Tl«. , rC702 (Insiructions on reverse side) Bwt qni <y n^ccsAPPLICATION NO: Six Distribution to:. □ OWNERPERIOD TO: 11/30/92 0 ARCHITECT□ CONTRACTORter ARCHITECT'S □PROJECT NO: □eet01 CONTRACT DATE;“ **'®'*" below, In connection with the Contract lA Document G703, is attached.%CT SUM........................................$ 279,400.00nge Orders...................................... f0-»A7.nni0 DATE (Line 1 s2)........................$ 270.133.00• A STORED TO DATE.....................$ 210.603.00C703) ’ eted Work $ _ 21,060.30 on G703) 1 Material S________0»00 CJ703) e Sa 5b or 11 of C703)....................................$ 21.060.30 5 RETAINACE.................................S 189,542.70 e 5 Total) RTIFICATES FOR 6 from prior Certilicsie)............ S__100,682,10 roUE.............................................t 88,86(L^ « H, PIUS RETAINACE.......................S amount certified differs from the amount ) ---------------- --------Dale: - negotiable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED Is payable only to th. rin. Issuance, payment and acceptance of payment are wilhou 1 of the Owner or Contractor under this Contract. . V APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT aia document c?02 dnsuuctions on reverse side)MCI OMt or MCtSTO (OWNER):CITY OF ORONO P,0. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN PROJECT: ORONO MUNICPAL FACILITY BID PACKAGE #355323 APPLICATION NO: 2 PERIOD TO:FROM (CONTRACrrOR): ZAHL EQUIPMENT COMPANY3101 SPRING ST. N.E. MPLS., MN 55413CONTRACT FOR: VEHICLE SERVICE EQUIP.VIA (ARCHITECT):BOARMAN & ASSC. 222 NORTH 2ND ST. MPLS., MN 55401 Distribution to: DOWNER D ARCHITECT □ CONTRACTORARCHITECT'S BID PACKAGE □PROJECT NO: #3 □CONTRACT DATE: 6/T5/92CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENTCHANCE ORDER SUMMARYChange Orders approved In previous months by OwnerTOTAL ADDITIONS DEDUCTIONSApproved this Month •Number Dale Approved TOTALS Net change by Change Orders Application is made for Payment, as shown below, in connection with Ihc Contract. Continuation Slieel, AIA Document C703, is attached.1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM......................................$ 31,712.00_________2. Net change by Change Orders...................................$3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (Line 1*2).......................S 31,712.004. TOTAL COMPLETED & STORED TO DATE...................$ 23^67.I7(Column G on C703)5. RETAINACE:a.------% of Completed Work t_________________(Column D > E on C703) _% of Slored Material $________________b__ (Column F on C703) Total Retainage (Line 5a * 5b or Total in Column I o( G703)$ The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief the Work covered by this Application (or Payment has been completed in accordance with the Contract Dorumeitls, that all amounts have been paid by the Contractor (or Work for which previous Certificates for Payment were issued and payments received from the Owner, and that current payment shown herein Is now due. 6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINACE...............................% 23,367.17 (Line 4 less Line 5 Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT (Line 6 from prior Certificate)....... 8. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE..........................................12^673.50 \ 9. BALANCE TO FINISH, PLUS RETAINAGE.............. (Line 3 less Line 6) ^12^,673.50 t^ (s'8.344.83 CONTRACTOR: By;Dale: State of: County Subscribed and sworn to before me this Notary Public: My Commission expires: « iffrritrrniinr ma^aiif oMmrvmup-uwwaDra ' MMSEy COUNTY uv cemwiaN emma MMi ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT In accordance with the Contract Documents, based on on>site observations and the data comprising the above application, the Architect certifies to the Owner that to the best of the Architect's knowledge, information and belief the Work has progressed as indicated, the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, and the Contractor is entitled to payment of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. AMOUNT CERTIFIED........................................................S (Affac/i explanaUon if amount (xrtified differs from the amount a/^lied forj ARCHITECT: 0b9rt(Y\r\l 1^^ • 0^ , m_____D..., ravable By: This Certificate is not n^miable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED Is payable only to the Contractor named hereinTlSsuance, payment and acceptance of payment are without prejudice to any rights ol the Owner or Contractor under this Contract. AIA OOCItMINT C7« • APTUrMtON AND CfItTiriCATE FOR MYMtNT • MAY l«] EDITION • AIA* • C IIS) rns af*"”''*n P" 'ir AKritirrrts irr, wrw ’.tu-t AvrMtir. nav. wasminctoh . t>.r. innoft C70Z*t9S3 tor Mcisbution to: VNER CHITECT tNERACTORI 1 BOUNTY MMI fei__ B only to tht It are without ct. C7BM9I3 APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT aia document cm (imiru<iion$ on revtne «<dc)MctONf Of n«tiMOlia: ORONO MUNICIPAL FACILITIES BID PACKAGE #3lOtOWNfR): CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323FROM {CONTKAOOai: zahL EQUIP. CO. VIA (ARCHITICT): BOARMAN & ASSC.3101 SPRING ST. N.E. 222 NORTH 2ND ST.CQNTMa,0., _________________MPLS^HN 55401 I(t RIOD TOi Distribtilion to: C OWNER S ARCHITECT □ CONTRACTORARCHITECTS □PROItaNO: BID . □PACKAGE #3 CONTRAaOATE: 6/15/92CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENTCHANCE ORDER SUMMARYChange Order* approved In previou* tiranlh* by OwnerTOTAl ADDITIONS OEDUaiONSApproved Ihit Monlh •Number Date Approved TOTALS Net chanse by Chanae Orders Appikatiofi it ifiMlf for fipment. at Mtm, In coontcliofi with iho Contract. Contiiiaaiion Shaft AIA Docymenl CTtt U attichfd.1. ORIGINM CONTRACT SUM...................................« 31,712,002. Net chM|t by CkMft Order*................................f -). CONTRACT SUM TO IMTf (line 21 .......................S_________________4. TOME COMmnO A STORED 10 DATE................t 10.693.67ICoHmim C on CTOn 5. RETMNACit a------% of Compleled Work f ________ (Cohimn DeE on C703) b. ___ % of Stored MMtrial $ - Ibt undcriigntd Conlraclof certMiet that to Ih* best of the Contractor^ knowledge, kitormaiion and belief Ihe Work covered by tWt Applicaiion for faynwni hai been compfetad In accordaiKC with ihe Contract Oocumcnii. that all atrKHinit have been paid by the Contractor for Wsrh for which previou* Certifkaie* for Payment were iMwed and paymenlt received from ihe Owner, artd that current payment shown herein it now due. (Column F on C703) Total Rctainage (line Sa e Sb or Total in Column I of CTOII................................S____________ S. TOTAIURMDUSS RnAINACE.............................S____________ (line 4 let* line S Ibial} 7. lESS PREVIOUS aRTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT (line S from prior Ccrtilicalel .............S .................- 0. CURRENT FAVAIENT PUI........................................t 10.693.67 9. RAlANa TO FINISH. PIUS REMINACE....................S (line 3 let* line 4} CONTRACTOR: •rs n... /r'/k/f. State of: County of: SubKtibed and twom to before me ihit Notary Pvblic: My Commitdon eapiret: day of .19 ARCHtTECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT In accordancf with tht CosMraci D:raimcnif, baied on on-silt observatkmf and the data comprising the above ^iion, the Architect certifies to ihe Owner that lo the best of the Aichitcctli knowledge, information a id belief the Work has progressed as indicaled. Ihe qualitir of the Wotk is in Kcordance with the ContrKt Oocumenis. and Ihe Contractof is tniltled to payipent of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. AMOUNT CIRTIfllD fAirach fxpfanar^ ii amounf ARCHIftCT: l-J ('Ji ir^^mounr rht^gwgynl ypired fprj o.. ■ii/'Wb pa^ble onhrThis Certificate H not n^otlMe. The AMOUNT .CERTIFIED If paykbft bnly lo Ihe ConfraciornamedhereifCtssuance, papmenr and acceptance of paiftneni are wiihovt prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor under this Contract. ai4 oocUMiNf cm • AmioaiON and ciniMCAif ioa rAvibeNi • may twi loinoN • aia* •« mi im AMiiCAN iNSiituti or AaoeifCTS. im niw iom avinui . n w. washimcion. d c »onoa CTtX-lltl cl TO: FROM DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator December 10, 1992 SUBJECT: City Facilities Change Orders COUNCIL MEETING DEC 1 4 1992 orroFORONo Several change orders are attached for Council review and approval An explanation of each follows: 1. Goebel Fixture Company - A deduction of $8,956,00. This cost reduction reflects deletions from the case work as part of efforts to reduce the facilities budget. 2. Twin City Garage Door - Total add of $1,403.00. This is fot the furnishing of control units for the public works garage door openers. These were planned as part of the project but were not included in the initial garage door contract, 3. Hoffer Inc. - This is a total deduct of $3,463.00. This is related to revisions to windows and doors as part of the budget reduction effort. 4. Kramer and Davis Inc. - Total add of $400. This related to additional damp proofing provided to the city offices foundation. 5. Mannstedt & Son Inc. - This is a total add of $793.00. This is related to a number of miscellaneous items that were changed when the shop drawings were completed. 6. LaForce Hardware and Manufacturing - This is o total add of $6,054.00. This is related to revisions to doors and frames and hardware to meet fire codes in the police security area. Th?.3 is also related to the addition of pushes and pulls on th‘ en.rance doors to the buildings. 7. Steenburg Watrud Construction - This is a total add of $11,974.00. This is related to additional work on footings and foundations to accommodate utilities and revisions to the police security area to meet State requirements. KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY CONTKACTORS e'* CO.NSTRL’CriON \1A\^GERS November 9, 1992 :-f-‘ f- ■ ; . { ‘ [Jit cnVoe 1 0 5S9?' Mr. Tom Kuehn City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Orono City Hail and Public Works Buildings K/A Project #4059 Dear Mr. Kuehn: Enclosed are four copies of change orders for the following con tractor (s): Goebel Fixture Company Change Order No. One Please sign all copies and return three of each to Kraus-Anderson. We will distribute to the appropriate parties. Very truly yours, KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY J<^n Davies Project Manager JD/lp Enc. Minneapolis Oivisk>n 525 South 8lh Street. Minneapolis. MN 55404 Phone: (612) 332-7281 FAX: (612) 332-8739 Equal Opportunity Employer CHANGE ORDER CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT EDITION AIA DOCUMENT C70VCM Distribution to; OWNER □ ARCHITECT □ CONSTRUCTION MANAGER □ CONTRACTOR □ FIELD □ OTHER □ PROIECT: Orono City Hall and (name,address) Public Works Buildings Crystal Bay, MN 55323 TO (Contractor): Goebel Fixture Company 528 Dale Street Hutchinson, MN 55350 CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: One ( 1) INITIATION DATE: October 21, 1992 ARCHITECT'S . KOjECT NO: 1124.04 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER'S PROJECT NO: You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract 4059 CONTRACT FOR: Finish Carpentry CONTRACT DATE: j^ay 11, 1992 Deduct in contract amount for items 1-4 listed on attached sheet.Total Deduct: ($8,356.00) Not valid until signed by the Owner, the Architect and the Construction Manager Signature of the Contractor indicates agreement herewith, including any adjustment m the Contract Sum or the Contract Time. The original (Contract was.............................................. $ $43,621.00 . Net change by previously authorized Change Orders ............................................................ $ -0- The (Contract SumfiC[K]UEifill9iaXlli^)iVd(X3Sst) prior to this Change Order was .............. $ 43,621.00 , The (Contract SumfOOUiiHMXXIUfKKMXXst) wll SKXdfi^sedl (decreaKSXXXJHi^l^ld) by this Change Order ..................................................................................................... $ (8,956.00). The new (Contract SimCfiUf NICXMMKWKNOnfiPst) including this Change Order will be...$ 34,665.00 . The Contract Time willj8lC»)nOl»eJto(SlBCKIBpJ) (unchanged) by ( ) Days. The Date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore IS December 31, 1992 Recommended: Approved: Kraus-Andersun Construction Company Boatman Kroos Pfister and Associates Mi nnAannl is. MfJ 55404 _ _ MiiineaDoli?^<*^f11l/ 5 5401 / BY \f DATE ^ Agreed To; Authorized: Goebel Fixture Company City of Orono_ _ _ _ CONTRACTOR OWNER Hutrrhinson. MN 55350_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Crystal Bav. MN 55323 ADDRESS / ^ ADDRESS , 7 // /.. X • % .JL / {__________./ BY- ' ' DATF BY DATE |iT1|1 CAUTION: You should sign an original AIA document which haa this caution printad in red. Illlll An original aaaurea that changes will not be obscured as may occur when documents are reproduced. AIA OOCUMINT CTtt/CM • CHANCE ORDER • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT EDITION . JUNE 19R0 EDITION • AIA« e 1W • THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, "TIS NEW YORK AVENUE. NW WASHINGTON, D C. MOOS C701/CM —1960 WAHNINQ: UnMc«nt«<f pAotocopytrig vloimt US. eopyrigtii iMot aM la tyStact lo lagal proaacutton. Goebel Fixture Company Chanye Order #1 - Attachment 1. Deduct in contract amount for revisions to casework as noted in Item 2A of Goebel Proposal <16444.Deduct ($4,026.00) 2. Deduct in contract amount for revisions to case*>7ork as noted in Item 2B of Goebel Proposal #6444.Deduct: ($3,200.00) .3. Deduct in contract amount for revisions to casework as noted in Item 2C of Goebel Proposal #6444.Deduct: ($ 330.00) 4. Deduct in contract amount for deleting base cabinets and melamine shelving on elevations 18 and 19 of 90.Deduct: <$1.400.001 Total Deduct: ($8,956.00) %• ik. KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY CONTRACTORS & CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS November 10, 1992 Mr. Tom Kuehn City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 wov 12 Re: Orono City Hall and Public Works Buildings K/A Project #4059 Dear Mr. Kuehn; Enclosed are four copies of change orders for the following coniractor(s); Twin City Garage Door Hoffer, Inc. Change Order No. One Change Order No. One Please sign all copies and return three of each to Kraus-Anderson. We will distribute to the appropriate parties. Very truly yours, KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Jgnn D;John Da\ies Project Manager JD/lp Enc. Minneapolis Division 52S South 8th Street. Minneapolis. M.N 55404 Phone: (612) 332-7281 FAX: (61 2) 332-8739 Equal Opportunity Employe'’ m CHANGE ORDER CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT EDITION AIA DOCUMENT C701/CM Distribution to: OWNER □ ARCHITECT □ CONSTRUCTION MANAGER □ CONTRACTOR □ FIELD □ OTHER □ PROJECT: (name, address) TO (Contractor): Orono City Hall and Public Works Buildings Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Hoffer, Inc. 8933 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 CHANCE ORDER NUMBER: ^ne (1) INITIATION DATE: November 2, 1992 ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: 1124.04 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER'S PROIECTNO: CONTRACT FOR: fro its. Glass & Glazing CONTRACT DATE: You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract; Furnish additional labor and material1. 2. necessary to make revisions to glass and glazing as required according to Proposal Request No. 6. Deduct in contract amount for revisions to aluminum windows and doors and changes to glass as noted in Proposal Request No. 7 except that the aluminum stools are not to be added. Add: $1,395.00 Deduct: ($4,858.00) Totals Net Deduct: ($3.463.00) Not valid until signed by the Owner,. le Architect and the Construction Manager. Signature of the Contractor indicates agreement herewith, including any adjustment in the Contract Sum or the Contract Time. 78,745.00 -0- 78,745.00* The original (Contract Sum) (CU&KXIHkKMIUBUiXfifiXK was.............................................. $ Net change by previously authorized Change Orders ............................................................ $ The (Contract Sum) RXIfrlfiKWiXIUGXifiifiXXiKKprior to this Change Order was .............. $ The (Contract Sum) KSUk^KHXaUCXtfKXXiKKwitl be (iXdij^) (decreased) (uX^^$ by this Change Order ..................................................................................................... $ (3,463.00) The new (Contract Sum) (fitMKNKNlClMXOmiOXOGXK including this Change Order will be...$ 75,282.00. The Contract Time will be (iKXN}«)l) (unchanged) by ( ) Days. The Date of Substantial Completion ar of ihe dale of this Chi"5’e Order therefore is December 31, 1992 Recommended:Approved: _ Boftrman Kr^os Pfister and Associates CONSTRUCTION MANAGER Minneapolis. MN 55404 BY DATE Agreed To: Hoffer. Inc. CONTRACTOR Blooir.inaton. MN 55420 ADDRESS V iiAAi. ARCHITECT TieaiJol 55401 Authorized: Citv of Orono OWNER Crystal Bay, MN 55323 ADDRESS DATE l|Tr1 CAUTION: Tou ahould sign an original AIA document which hat thia caution printed in rad. An original aasurta that changaa will not be obacurad aa may occur whan documanta ara raproducad. AIA DOCUMINT Cm/CM • CHANCI O«0£« • CONSTRUCTION MANACtMSNT lOITION . JUNC 1M0 EDITION . AIA« anW# ”THE AWtRlCAN INSTITUTE Of ARCHITtaS, ITJS NEW YORK AVENUE. NW. WASHINGTON. OC 100»C701/CM »IfW V CHANGE ORDER CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT EDITION AIA DOCUMENT C701/CM Distribution to; OWNER □ ARCHITECT □ CONSTRUCTION MANAGER □ CONTRACTOR □ FIELD □ OTHER □ PROJECT: (name, address) TO ^Contractor): Orono City Hall and Public Works Buildings Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Twin City Garage Door 4609 85th Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55443 CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: One (1) INITIATION DATE: October 21, 1992 ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO; 1124.04 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER'S PROJECT NO; CONTRACT FOR: CONTRACT DATE: You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract 4059 Overhead Doors May 11, 1992 Furnish and deliver radio controls for overhead doors as noted on the approved shop drawings.Add: $1,403.00 Not valid until signed by the Owner, the Architect and the Construction Manager. Signature of the Contractor indicates agreement herewith, including any adjustment in the Contract Sum or the Contract Time. 21,945.00 -0- 21,945.00 The original (Contract SumlJCOiKKXBHfiNHJUHUWfiBXK was .............. .................................. $ Net change by previously authorized Change Orders..................................................................... $ The (Contract Sum) XafiSfrJHamxafiXDOtaEXXUXprior to this Change Order was .............$ The (Contract Sum) XauaaamMfiOGXdfiKXXlUCwill be (increasedXXflUfiUUB) by this Change Order............................................................................................... $ 1,403.00 The new (Contract Sum)MRMHnKR}(!)OH(9HaC$tXK including this Change Order will be...$ 23,348.00 The Contract Time will be]gggmiN9(KM9QRIK!D (unchanged) by ( ) Days. The Date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is December 31, 1992 Recommended: Approved: Roiftman Kroos Pfister and AssociatesCons tirugon Company CONSTRUCTION MANAGER Minnqanniigp MN 55404 55401 DATE Agreed To DATE Twi n ty Door CONTRACTOR City of Orono * S5443 OWNER Crystal Bav. MN 55323 ADDRESS DATE DATE CAUTION: You should sign an original AIA documant which has this caution printad in rod. An original assuras that changta will not bo obscurod as may occur whon documanta aro raprodueod. AM OOCUMINT C7S1/CM • CHANCE OaOEi • CONSTtUCTION MANAGEMENT EDITION « JUNE 1S60 EDITION • AIA* O 1SK • THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITEaS, 17» NEW YORK AVENUE. N w.. WASHINGTON. D C. 20006 C701/CM ~ 19M WUeewO; UnWcanaad photocapyine violaiaa Ul. copyrtsM lawn and <a aubfact lo lasal proat uMew. .j L... KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY CONTRACTORS S CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS ‘ n'(C November 19,1992 u,—.^^LiSuv^Eiiy., Mr. Tom Kuehn City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 NOV 2 0 i992 Re: Orono City Hall and Public Works Buildings K/A Project #4059 Dear Mr. Kuehn: Enclosed are four copies of change orders for the following con tractor (s): Kremer and Davis, Inc. Mannstedt and Son, Inc. Change Order No. One Change Order No. Two Please sign all copies and return three of each to Kraus-Anderson. We will distribute to the appropriate parties. Very truly yours. KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Qt^ lohn DavJohn Davies Project Manager JD/lp Enc. Minneapolis Division 525 South 8th Street, Minneopolis, MN 55404 Phone: (612) 332-7281 FAX: (612) 332-8739 Equal Opportunity Emp*over CHANCE ORDER rONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT EDITION AIA DOCU\/f,vr cr07 CM Distribution to: OWNER n ARCHITECT □ CONSTRUCTION NtVNAGER □ CONTRACTOR C FIELD □ OTHER G PROJECT: Orono City Hall and (name, address) Public Works Buildings Orono, MN TO (Contractor): CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: One (1) INITIATION DATE:September 16, 1992 ARCHITECTS PROJECT NO: 1124.04 Kremer and Davis, Inc. 3900 Jefferson Street N.E. Minneapolis, MN 55421 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER'S PROJECT NO:4059 CONTRACT FOR: Waterproofing CONTRACT DATE; August 28, 1992 You are directed to make the following changes m this Contract; 1, Delete insulation over waterproofed areas.Deduct: ($1,240.00) 2. Repair damaged waterproofing.Add: $ 150.00 3. Add dampproofing at city offices foundation.Add: $1,490.00 Total Net Add:400.00 IL Sol valid until signed by the Owner, the Architect and the Construction Manager Signature of the Contractor indicates agreement herewith, including anv ad|ustment in the Contract Sum or the Contract Time. The original {Contract Sum)X«iKKXKK:38»Xtt]OCKtXX was ................................................. S 2,925.00 . Net change by previously authoriied Change Orders................................................................ S ”■0” The (Contract Sum) XXXfXiXd^XXXiXXiKXXiiQ). prior to this Change Order was .............. S 2,925.00* The (Cor..ract Sum) XXiXaQ«Safl»XXi«(iXtJOeQ) will be 'increasecKX!3f)0X»e<X»)ejC!»JWd) by this Change Order............................................................................................................ S 400.00 * The new iContract Sum) including this Change Order will be...S 3,325.00- The Contract Time will beXK<XM)n4X!XKX9«}0t) (unchanged) by ( ) Days. TheDateofSubstaiitialCompletionasof the date of this Change Order thererore IS December 31, 1992 Recommended: Approved: Krang-Andersnn Const-rurt: i r^n rnmnanv Rr->;y‘man Krnng JLf isl-er and Assort! a CONSTRUCTION .MANAOER ARCHt^ECT ~ 11 „ „ . -, Minneapolis, MN 55404 MirAeapoIxs, /it/ 55401_ _ _ _ _ _ _ Agreed To: Authorized: Kremer and Davis. Inc.______________City,of Qxono______________________________ ‘^SinneapoliSt_MN 55421 ‘crys_yl Bay, MN 55323 \\-\x^ :!!!!_____________ jy” ^ ^ • % DATE BY date AIA DOCUMENT C?«VCM • CHANCE ORDER • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT EDITION . |UNE 19« EDITION . AlA* • THE AMERIOW INSTITUTE Of ARCHITECTS. T7JS NEW YORK AVENUE. NW, WASMINCTO s DC. .-0006 C701/CM — 1980 WARNWO: omieeftMd photocopyHig vtotMM US. eopyfigiH Hw and !• «ito|«et ID 1*911 pMMOieon. CHANGE ORDER CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT EDITION AM DOCUMENT C701/CM Oislribution to: OWNER □ ARCHITECT □ CONSTRUCTION MANAGER □ CONTRACTOR □ FIELD □ OTHER □ PROJECT: Orono City Hall and (name,address) Public Works Buildings Crystal Bay, MN 55323 TO (Contractor): Mannstedt and Son, Inc. 4801 Nicollet Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55409 CHANCE ORDER NUMBER: Two ( 2 ) INITIATION DATE: November 5, 1992 ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: 1124.04 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER'S PROJECT NO: CONTRACT FOR: CONTRACT DATE: 4059 Structural Steel and Metal Fab. May 11, 1992 You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract; Furnish additional materials as required due to changes in shop drawings as directed per July 17th list.Add: $793.00 Not valid until ligncd by tht Owntr, tho Architect and the Construction Manager. Signature oi the Contractor indicates agreement herewith, including any adjustment in the Contract Sum or the Contract Time. Th. <Kl|ln.l ICom..cl S»>M w.. .. .................................. Net change by previously authorized Change Orders .................t f................................... The (Contract prior to this Change Order was ......... The (Contract Sum)will be (increased) by this Change Order.............................................................................................. The new (Contract SumKRSiiiUMtttttXItiUUfiXXXjQ including this Change Order will be ... The Contract Time will b^lUfiaUW) XflUEfiXM) (unchanged) by ( The Date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is Decembe r 31, 40,460.00 8,540.00 49,000.00 793.00 49,793.00 199^“*'“ Recommended:Approved: Boarfian Kroos Pfiste’' and Associates CONSTRUCTION MANAGER MinnedDolis, MN 55404 U-iB-Sz.« Ij DATE Agreed To: Mannstedt and Son, Inc. CONTRACTOR Minneapolis, MN 55409 ithorized: City of Orono OWNER ^ ^ ^ Crystal Bay, MN 55323 ADDRESS ADDRESS DATE DATE AIA AUTICI^: You ehould sign en original AIA document which hat thia caution prtntad in red. An original assuras that changae will not ba obacurau aa may occur whan documania ara raproducad. AIA DOCUMINT CTil/CM • CHANCE ORDER • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT EDITION a JUNE 19R0 EDITION • AIA# • 1f» • THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OE ARCHiTEaS. 17JS NEW YORK AVENUE. N.W . WASHINGTON. O.C TOM mmma: C701/CM~19M KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY CONTRACTORS \ CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS November 16, 1992 'na C 7%' 0= C'’C‘X /rrs Mr. Tom Kuehn CityofOrono NOV i 8 1092 P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Orono City Hall and Public Works Buildings K/A Project #4059 Dear Mr. Kuehn; Enclosed are four copies of change orders for the following con tractor (s): LaForce Hardware and Mfg. Change Order No. One Steenberg-Watrud Construction Change Order No. Two Please sign all copies and return three of each to Kraus-Anderson. We will distribute to the appropriate parties. Very truly yours, KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Project Manager JD/lp Enc. Minneapolis Division 525 South 8th Street, Minneapolis, MN 55404 Phone: (612) 332-7281 FAX: (612) 332-8739 Equal OpfKirtunitv Employer CHANGE ORDER Swner “°" “ CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT EDITION architect □ AIA DOCUMENT C701/CM CONTRACTOR MANAGER □ FIELD □ OTHER □ PROJECT: Orono City Hall and CHANCE ORDER NUMBER: (name,address) Public Works Buildings Orono, MN INITIATION DATE: September 24, 1992 TO (Contractor): ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: 112 4.04 LaForce Hardware aid Manufacturing CONSTRUCTION MANAGER'S 1060 West Mason Street PROJECT NO: 4059 Green Bay, WI 54303 CONTRACT FORl CONTRACT DATE: May 11, 1992 You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract:1. Deduct in contract amount for deleting hollow metal frame and pocket door at folding partition opening #A105 per Proposal Request No. 13. Deduct; ($ 394.00) 2. Add to contract amount for revisions to doors, frames and hardware as required to changes noted in Proposal Request No. 6, Revised. Add; $4,012.00 3. Add to contract amount for revisions to doors, frcimes and hardware as noted in Proposal Request No. 15. Add; $2,436.00 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Total Net Add; $6,054.00 Not valid until signed by the Owner, the Architect and the Construction Manager. Sigruture of the Contractor indicates agreement herewith, including any adjustment in the Contract Sum or the Contract Time. The original (Contract Sum) ......................................................5 35,465.0Q Net change by previously authorized Change Orders..................................................................... $ -0- The (Contract Sum) OQlM)n(4eM}UeKOtNIOMX80) prior to this Change Order was ............... $ 35,465.00 The (Contract Sum) (C36»)OXM94XaKOmNOCCOO) will be (increased) by this Change Order.................................................................................................... $ 6,054.0(^ The new (Contract Sum) ((SiNMMteNjCMNmOXOCKOftN including this Change Order will be...$ 41,519.OB The Contract Time will be (iOnONN9tKMN9M}<^]t&4unchanged) by ( ) Days. The Date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change 0'r*er therefore is Decamber 31, 1992 Recommended: Approi«d: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Boarman Kj?ot©s Pfister and Associates CONSTRUCTION MANAGER ARCHIJECT Minneapolis, MN 55404_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ MimneanelisA MN 5540 Agreed To: ^Authorized: LaForce Hardware and Manufacturing City of Orono_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ CONTRAOCOR OWNER Gr^^n/Bay, WI,^43J>9^ _ _____ Crystal Bay, MN 55323_____________ AIA DOCUMENT C791/CM • Cl^NGE • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT EDITION • |UNE 1980 EDlTfON • AIA# lOAA 9 IftO • TM€ AMCAIG^N INSTITUTE Of ARCHITECTS, 17J5 NEW YORK AVE.NUE, N W , WASHINGTON, D C 20006 G/ln/vnl — WARNINQ; ohatocoovirNi vIolafM U S cocwHohi laws and is sublact to laoal orosacutlon CHANGE ORl. « CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT EDITION AM DOCUMENT C701/CM Distribution to: OWNER □ ARCHITECT □ CONSTRUCTION MANAGER □ CONTRACTOR □ FIELD □ OTHER □ CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: ^ ^ ^ INITIATION DATE: October 22, 1992 1124.04 PROJECT: Orono City Hall and (name,address) Public Works Buildings Crystal Bay, MN 55323 TO (Contractor): ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: Inver Grove Heights, MN 55076*'^^^^' CONTRACT FOR: Concrete/Masonry May 11, 1992 4059 CONTRACT DATE: You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract: Add to the contract for items 1 - 41isted on attached sheet.Total Add: $11,974.00 Not valid until signed by the Owner, the Architect and the Construction Manager. Signature of the Contractor indicates agreement herewith, including any adjustment in the Contract Sum or the Contract Time. I 342,500.00 . (13,870.75). 328,629.25 . The original (Contract SumKKKKifa»i«X(U(d(afiKX2E« was.............................................. $ Net change by previously authorized Change Orders .........# 1.......................................... $ The (Contract Sum) XOlNMIOMi ’'CKWOCNKfiNK pi.jr to this Change Order was .............. $ The (Contract SumlXIAMfliatt '^WttlNKO&XK will be (increasedCXdtiUiiWdlXiJHaUfjjad) by this Change Order ..................................................................................................... $ 11,974.00 . The new (Contract including this Change Order willbe...$ 340,603.25. The Contract Time will JtfRXWigdl (unchanged) by { ) Days. The Date of Substantial Completion as of rhe date of this Change Order therefore is December 31, 1992 Recommended: Approved: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Boarman Ko?os Pfister and Associates CONSTRUCTION MANAGER Minneapolis, MN 55404 ARCH^CT nnMiyneaboliy, MN 55401 ADDRESS DATE Agreed To: Steenberq-Watrud Coa^ruction CONTRACTOR / . y / Authorized : City of Orono Inve!^^r •Y MN 55076 OWNER Crystal Bay, MN 55323 ADDRESS DATE DATEnntg CAUTION: You should sign in original AIA document which has this caution printad in red. An original aasuras that changes will not be obscured as may occur whan documents are reproduced. AIA DOCUMSNT CTtl/CM • CHANCI OtOlt • CON$T«UCTION MANACtMfNT tOITlON « |UNC 1SW tOlTION . AIA* • ISM • TMl AMiaiCAN INSTITUTI Of AICHlTiaS. 17J5 NEW VO*K AVtNUI. N W , WASHINGTON, D C. ZOOM C701/CM —19t0 WARNSIO: UnScwnae pHoMtOMlnf vtoMaa US. copyHiW MW and u niSiart te UpU piew cuWow. ■ 2. 3. 4. Stcenberg-Watrud Construction. Inc Change Order #2 - Attachment 1. Furnish addiuonal labor and material necessary to drop footings and foundadon walls for udlides according to Proposal Request No. 4. Furnish addidonal labor and material necessary to cut out and change foodngs at south side of Police Building to accommodate utility piping. Furnish labor and material necessary to add footing and change blockwork at security area for precast a noted in Proposal Request No. 6 - Revised. Furnish lauor and material necessary to add core fill at security area as required according to Proposal Request No. 6. Add: $ 2,831.00 Add: $ 518.00 Add: S 1,380.00 Add: S 7.245.00 Total Add: $11,974.00 TO: FROM: DATE: Ron MoorsOf City Administrator John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director December 10, 1992 ‘-'6*9 • JO % SUBJECT: Crystal Bay Post Office Lease In March of 1992, I began discussion with a representative of the post office to determine the feasibility of a longer term lease (5 year). Due to time constraints nothing more was done. I have begun the dlscusc^on again and should have the matter resolved in early 1993 (see attached letter). Items that need to be considered are: 1. Paint interior/exterior 2. Sidewalk slabs at entrance - replace or repair 3. Connect to sanitary sewer (complete) 4. Driveway to rear of building - temporarily December, 1992 5. Replace vestibule and lobby tile. installed Other matters for consideration but not necessary for lease agreement are: 1. Parking lot 2. Furnace replacement. ch //'/o o\ % 'fIv-.4', November 20, 1992 CITY of ORONO talOfllctIkt 66 Bay, Mim»R#R»55323-) Mr. Dave Manning* Real Estate Specialist United States Postal Service Facilities Service Office 2051 Killebrew Drive Suite 620 Bloomington, Minnesota 55425-1874 Dear Dave: As per our telephone conversation on November 20, 1992, it is the City of Orono’s intent to enter into a five year lease wi* the U.S. Postal Service for the Crystal Ba>Y Post Office. As per my u ;rstanding with Martin Stadle ' of your division, the City will perf^ . .t the necessary improvements as follows: 1. Paint interior/exterior - caulk windows. 2. Improve parking area and provide vehicle access to rear of building. 3. Replace entry slab. 4. Replace vestibule and lobby tile. I will be developing costs on the above items as soon as possible to determine the monthly lease amount. I have attached a copy of th«y most recent correspondence from Martin Stadler. If you have ' *r questions, please call me at 473-7357. Since ' / p-ini John R. Gerhardson Public Works Director JR /ch FELEPHONE-473-7357 • FAX-473-Q5I0 (/J TO: PROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council o Moorse, City Administrator December 10, 1992 council meerng dec 1 4 m? CITY OF ROMO SOBJECT: Change in Council Meeting Start Time The normal start for regular City Council meetings has been 7:00 p.m. The Council at its December 10 work session discussed changing the start time to 7:30 p.m. beginning in January of 1993. The change in start time can be accomplished through a motion of the Council. TO; FROM; DATE: SUBJECT; Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning AdministratorcC i . ' <I December 10, 1992 #1760, City of Orono - 1000 Old Crystal Bay Road - Preliminary Subdivision In preparing the subdivision application for Planning Commission review, staff identified a number of issues that significantly affect the application. Based on these issues, the Planning Commission t»cblic hearing was postponed until a later meeting. Written notice was sent to all previously advised property owners of the tabling of the application. The application cannot be completed until Council resolves the residential density, timing of development of wilderness park, and type of access to serve residential unit(s), public park and MWCC facility. A. Brief Review of the Application In late 1991 Dahlgren, Shardlow & Uban were asked to prepare a preliminary development study for the Park Commission to study potential park use of the property referenced as the "sewage lagoon property". The majority of the Park Commission recommended that the property be retained for exclusive park and pedestrian trail use. The Planning Commission concep':ually reviewed this proposal in early 1992 and unanimously recommended that the prop ^rty be retained for park use only and not open for residential development. As the revenues from the sale of this property were included in the budget considerations for the new facility. Council directed that the property be subdivided limiting residential development to two lotslots and an outlot for future park development. The property is currently served by a gravel drive maintained by the City. The City maintained drive provides access to the MWCC facility and the City's open yard storage area. Historic *»nd current use of the property has made major portions of the property unsuitable for on-site septic development. Review Exhibit B. Weeirman reports that proposed Lot 1 could never support an on-site septic system and a possible realignment of the lot lines would make for unacceptable building envelopes as the only suitable area for septic development is on proposed Lot 2. It is possible to achieve a single unsewered rural lot but if it is the intent of the City to create two lots, the property must be served with sewer. Sewer lines are located to the immediate wes*' within the gravel drive area. Review Exhibit C, Gustafson's report, in which he recommends that service connections be placed 5' apart at the common lot line to simplify construction. Both lots do not meet the 2 acre dry contiguous as follows: Lot 1 - 1.665 acres dry, .335 acres wet Lot 2 - 1.863 acres dry, .137 acres wet MemoDecamber 10» 1992 Page 2 Review Exhibit A, the location of the wetlands on the east and west side of the lotSr the access road serving the MWCC facility and the need to maintain an open corridor to the northwest of Lot 1 for future park access limits lot line placement. Site Condition Gerhardson has advised the review staff that current outdoor storage use will cease sometime in late spring or early summer of 1993. Because of the variations in height between Lot 1 and Lot 2, the City Engineer is recommending grading corrections. Review Exhibit A. Note drainage way that intersects Lot 1. Drainage way has great significance as it carries drainage from the wetlands on west side to the French Lake basin. This drainage way cannot be restricted. The Engineer recommends that it be relocated along the roadway and then along the north side of Lot 1 eventually draining into the French Lake basin. The City will be responsible for filing permit applications with the DNR, MCWD and Corp of Engineers if these alterations are to be proposed with the subdivision. If the subdivision is proposed at a one lot rural develooment, then these alterations would not be necessary. Location of the wetlands in the southwest portion of the property presents problems for an expanded roadbed as it will encro ich closer to the wetland. In fact, the Engineer's report notes the sharp horizontal curve at the southeast corner of the existing road. An expanded and improved road will require the filling of a portion of the existing wetlands in order to maintain the necessary side slope for ditch area. (Review Exhibit D, L jineer's sketch) Based on the proposed level of use (two residential lots, MWCC lift station and future park), the City Engineer has recommended that a road be constructed to City's standards with an out lot shown at a 50* minimum width with a 100' cul-de-sac. Minimum paved width of the road based on standard for a rural section would be 24' with an 80* diameter cul-de-sac. The cost of this construction is proposed at approximately $100,000.00. Section 10.33, Subd. 4 calls for road development at the time three to six units are to be served. Based on the final residential density of the plat and the status of the future park development. Council must determine if a road is necessary at this time. The City currently maintains the road for access to its open yard storage area and for the MWCC service vehicles. If the drive is to continue to be maintained by City for access to MWCC facility, will future residential owners pay City for maintenance of road? If additional land use applications are necessary to complete the subdivision apolication and it is the intention of the City to continue with the public hearing at the Planning Commission in January, staff must receive Council's decision prior to December deadline for submitting legal publication notices. MemoDecember 10, 1992 Page 3 Options for Development and Required Improvements Subdivision of one residential lot, future park outlet and road outlet (review Exhibit B) Lot line to be adjusted so that single lots contain 2 acres dry contiguous land. Complete septic testing to determine septic design for a 5 bedroom home. lipark area is not to be developed at this time. Minimal upgrading of existing gravel drive and possible paving is recommended. Additional grading and relocation of drainage way within proposed Lot 1 is no longer necessary but regrading, cleanup of drainage way and restoration of ground cover in disturbed area is required. If park is to be developed in 1993/94, road, parking area and turnaround should be developed per either Engineer's recommendation or because road serves only one residential unit limit road width so as not to encroach wetlanrl. This may also be accomplished by realigning west or street lot line of residential lot. If public park area is developed a turnaround and parking area must be developed. If this scenario is chosen, a Comp Plan Amendment is not necessary nor filing a permit application with any other agency - that is if we can keep road improvements out of the wetlands. B. Subdivision of Two Residential Lots, Future Park Outlet and Road Outlet (Review Exhibit P) Two residential lots will require sewer in order to meet septic needs and area needs as now wetlands areas can be credited. Drainage way that now intersects Lot 1 must be relocated along the west and north boundaries of Lot 1. Major filling and regrading of proposed Lot 1 to prepare for a building site. If park is to be installed in 1993-94, road upgrade, turnaround and parking area must be developed. The City may take the position that the development of the park creates the need for the upgrading of the road as the MWCC facility is a utility structure/use requiring minimal visits to the site. With this layout the west or street lot lines of Lot 2 cannot be realigned to provide more room for the realignment of the curve at the southeast corner. There will be an encroachment of the wetlands with an upgrading of a road. Thfs scenario will require the following land use applications and pt-r * : t review: Filing of a Comp Plan Amendment to allow for the realignment of the MUSA boundary. This should not be difficult as there is no proposed change in zoning. Consistent with the Comp Plan where we are not increasing densities as a result of the sewering. MemoDecember 10, 1992 Page 4 File permit applications with DNR and MCVHD for realignment of drainage way and filling and grading activities within protected setback areas from natural environment lake* Pending level of road improvements required the filling of the wetland at the west side will require permit review by the MCV7D and the Corp of Engineers. Please let me know if you need additional information. Once again it is imperative that if Council wishes to proceed with this application and schedule review by the Planning Commission at their January meeting that we try to meet the December 21st deadline, if necessary. for realignment ;tivities within vironment lake, a the filling of permit review by formation. Once roceed with this mission at their St deadline, if r. • - % 1 * .1-1 a♦» * zi ;^ I *1 •• fli* f .=w -=^1 : ||U I ??fss l=E * " C-3^ Ilf lii !~i ...-C \ 1 i 1 t h 1 • aS (1 ^ iHi •SS■ ®‘S > • 11 ■Nl 'S T i lb ! ■ 1■se 5 1 11 i.I I TT r I Mis I-- 53?:f?5K=: o> • «5 ‘:?3 It! i il ! Sli* * 1= <l6i»sSI -I-8*.! V<Zfl i r‘- Wl^rZ •. ? 4 j ** * t ' TO; FROM: DATE: RE: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Stephen Weckman# On-Site Systems Manager 11/13/92 Subdivision #1700, City of Orono - Septic Review This 2 lot subdivision has been reviewed to determine the suitability of these lots for on-site sewage treatment. Both sites have excavated and filled areas as well as compaction due to travel from heavy equip..ent. Additional soil testing indicating suitable drainfield sites would be required prior to subdivision approval. However, preliminary site evaluation performed by staff is as follows: LOT 1 This lot is very limited by heavy equipment traffic and the storage of road materials on the southern one-third of the property. A drainage ditch also bisects the property with fill soils north of the drainage way. Based on these site conditions, on-site sewage treatment would not be feasible for the property. LOT 2 Site conditions appear to ne suitable for both the primary and alternate drainfield sites. Soil borings indicate that the depth of seasonal saturation (mottling) is between 16" and 22" rc tjuiring installation of a mound system. Two sites appear to be available which have slopes less than 6% and adequate site drainage. These sites would allow a house location within the required building envelope. SUMMARY Preliminary site evaluation indicates that Lot 1 is not suitable for on-site sewage treatment. Lot 2 does appear to have suiteible area available for both primary and alternate drainfield sites, however additional soil testing and system design would be required. Staff explored the possibility of a lot line rearrangement co provide on-site sewage treatment for both properties, but was deemed impossible. The only drainfield sites available are currently on Lot 2 and rearrangement of the lot line would leave an unacceptable building envelope even if sufficient area for primary and alternate sites is available. --Ono G Bo'^urrc **E fiotx'ff W PE * jowv^' C AixJef’.* PE Mjrvir L ^y\Jt3 ^E Pc^jrH £ Turner Pi Gi<r^r« ff Coc* PE E \oy^v PE Pcrrc PE Suwn V Ec^^'*<^ CPA "S^^njCf CcnSiiltjnf 1/1 Bonestroo ^yi Rosene Anderlik& Associates Engineers & Architects November 5, 1992 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: #1780 City of O ono Subdivisio*’ File No. 139-178' MOWd'd A PE A GortXjn PE Rocert R P*eTer!e PE PMOjfxj 'A Poste' P£ D,i\'C O louctJ PE PeceT C Puiie^^ A ' A J^rry A BOufdon PE Mark A Hansc>n P$ Mchae^ T ffaufmarn PE K P ek3 PE 7 v/ras 9 Arxje'von A ! A DonakJ C Borgardt PE roomas £ Anguv P£ Martinez P£ Vt<r'ari P Rau PE Agnet M Prvj A ' C p Tnomas w Pete'scr^ pe Mv»'ae C P£ Jar^s R Va anj ^E e'r\ D Prrvtcn P£ Aenr>efn P Ar<3e<vy' PE Mark ff Rof\ PE Mark A Se-a PE Gary w Mor>en P£ Daniel j Ecjgerron P£ Da*V A K»rv:nenman p £ P^ii'O J Caswe^ PE \tar»i D Aa.iiv PE Miiei a Jensen p £ L pn.tj.p Gravel »i P£ Aa/en L Wien-en PE Ga% D Ar stoftz p£ ^ ’ooj Poster P£ •cetr R '■aop p £ Shawn D Guitafscn ( Cec 1*0 Qiiv-er PE Charles A Enefcson Leo M Paweisfcy Hsrijn M Oisor* James P EngeihartH Immsdow CITY Of ORONO NOV e 1992 Dear Jeanne: We have reviewed the preliminary plat for the City of Orono subdivision on the old sewage lagoon property located at the northeast quadrant of Old Crystal Bay Road and North Shore Drive along the west shoreline of French Lake. The City has not done topographic contour mapping for this area. The vngineering review with respect to the site grading, house elevations and general constructability will be best accomplished after this information is provided. Our inspection reveals that Lot 2 is considerably higher than Lot 1 and this may require some griding correction. A grading plan shou' ’ be prepared that shows the existing and proposed contours as well as the drainage routes. French Lake is a Type 3/4 wetland protected by the DNR and identified as Protected Water HOP on the Protected Waters Inventory Map for Hennepin County. The established ordinary high water level (OHWL) of French Lake (South Basin) is 930.0 with a 934.3 OHWL for the sewage lagoon. There is also a small wetland located north and west of the proposed roadway. This wetland is a Type 2, seasonally flooded inland fresh meadow. This wetland is not protected by the DNR. At the State level, the wetland would be regulated by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District under the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act. At the present time, interim guidelines for the Act are in force. Permanent rules are being prepared which will take effect on July 1, 1993. At the Federal level, the wetland is regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Any draining, burning o filling of the wetland will require a permit and compensatory mitigation. The drainage in the area flows east from Old Ciystal Bay Road to French Lake and then southwesterly to Crystal Bay. There is an existing ditch that runs northeasterly from the .small wetland area to French Lake. There aie two existing culverts in the ditch where the existing access roads to the MWCC Lift Station and City equipment storage cross. The ditch runs diagonally through the building envelope of Lot 1. This drainage route must not be blocked. Page 1 139.cor 233S Wtst Highway 36 • St. PauL Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 . f We recommend that the route be altered to run north along the proposed roadway and then east to French Lake. The e.xisting culverts can most likely be salvaged and reused when the roadway is improved. Drainage and utility easements should be provided along the course of the drainage ditch as well as across the wetland areas. The sanitary sewer service to the parcels must be provided by core cutting into the existing concrete pipe that runs north to the MWCC Lift Station. We recommend that the service connections be done 5 feet apart at the common lot line to simplify the construction. The proposed roadway should be constructed in accordance with City standards. Street plans should be prepared that show the proposed centerline profile. . ne sharp horizontal curve at the southeast corner has an approximate centerline radius of 80 feet which does not meet the required minimum of 275 feet. Constructing the roadway to a 275 foot centerline radius would requir e filling approximately 0.25 acres of wetland and is not recommended. We recommend flattening the curve to a 150 foot centerline radius which should avoid the wetland and »mprove the road safety. The curve should be posted for a 20 mph speed, or 25 mph if the curve is superelevated. The estimated cost for the roadway is $100,000 with $25,000 being assessed each to Lot 1, Lot 2, the park and the MWCC property. The proposed parking for the future park can be provided at several locations. We recommend that it be located on the west side of the roadway and south of the proposed cul-de-sac. The necessary area required for 12 parking spaces and ctie handicapped space is 20 feet wide and l20 feet long. I» is feasible that the parking could be located to the north of the cul-de-sac if the MWCC would approve moving the existing fence. When more detailed plans are prepared, they should be reviewed by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and Metropolitan Waste Control Commissioi.. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. SDG.U Page 2. 139.cor JiraiTt fUhTYi •lEJTl Mnr« 4 ♦ u- OUTLOT y^. 7a i Acaes Sfu,A»f ^ 'y A »«» • • « « • l>»kr '9H*o fftfA i CAKf ff4UrkJ4t/^^) - o •' lilo WEST Big IS 9?ZfO . IJOO 1# S*H D Z 9 m 8|0 O o om 3 Z! 39o m C m s r • z H (/).*< m _ o -n jiPSHJO> s •»! ^ o 3D o *1 ■#• I - “‘•jiA--------------- - e I F . j ^T I« r 5 ln-<p pr H C “ Jo” S i? ijiii!! ff TO: FROM: OATS: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator December 11, 1992 Vi SUBJECT: Telephone System Move and Expansion qij fi- COUMCR MEEHN6 DEC 1 4 1992 CfTYOFORONO After obtaining quotes from three telephone system vendors staff is recommending Integrated Communications Inc. be selected as the vendor to move the current phone system to the new facilities, and provide additional equipment for the additional office areas, mainly the police department. Because the police department's current phone system and equipment are not compatible with the city's phone system, new phones must be purchased for the police department. The total cost of the system move and expansion will be $7,380.00. This includes the following items: 13-8 button phones 7 o single line phones 6 - single line wall phones - expansion cards for the phone system to accommodate the additional phones - 15 minute uninterruptable power supply to protect against short term power outages - move the current phone system to the new facilities T • ] «4 ; i *f\ \ 4s: ADDENDUM LIST OP LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR MEETING OP 12/14/92_ _ _ _ _ _ _ On and Off Sale Ngn-Intoxicating Malt Liquor CUiiNCIL MEETING DEC 1 4 1992 Navarre Laneis 3435 Shoreline Drive CITYOFOIIOIIO DatP! To: From: Subject: Decombor 11, 1992 Ron Moorse, City Administrator Steve Sullivan, Chief of Police Li<^uor License Renewal - Navarre Lanes A review o£ Mr. Schervan and of Navarre Lanes has been made concerning his liquor license renewal. No liquor law violations were found and I have no objection to the Issuance of this license. However, Mr. Schervan should be reminded to submit his license in a more tijneiy fashion in the future. The police department needs at least one week to properly conduct the background Investigation that is required. i LIST OF LICENSES FCR COUNCIL APPROVAL /) C'December 14, 1992 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - % % FOR MEETING OF ^V % ^ ‘Residential Kennel License: Steve Esco 320 Big Island • Wayne and Gayle Carrier 1376 North Arm Drive Suzanne Fackler 3700 Togo Road • ^ Judith Spinner 940 North Arm Drive Thomas & Ingrid Anderson ^ 3550 North Shore Drive Comjnercial Kennel License: The Dog House Boarding Kennels, Inc. 3507 Wayzata Boulevard On-Sale Liquor - Jimmies Lounge 3380 Shoreline Drive $ Off-Sale Liquor - Navarre Liquors 3421 Shoreline Drive Club Liquor - Wayzata Country Club • 200 Wayzata Country Club • . WoodhijLl Country Club 200 Woodhill Road Off-Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor - O’Sullivans 2420 Shadywood Road On-Sale* Non-Intoxieating Malt Liquor - Orono Golf 265 Orono Orchard Road South • t • • PCSNNEL LICENSE APPLICATION Effective January 1, 19 to Deceniber 31, 19_^l£. Owner;^ JiL.5ccP Property Address; O I^.P^-( ^ ^u<!^l'J L (include city and zrp]V' Mailing Address (if different) Phone: home )C{'^4'P?7 / in 777?ho 4. (work ' RBSIDENTXAL Kennel License Info^.ation: $2o.00 (payment must accompany application) __ Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one timer— (over 3 months of age) Lab _ _ _ _ _ _Principal Breed:_ _ .. iirpose for more than 2 dogs:__ CITY OF OROHQ FISAY^CE OFFICE 1313500000 01 OEH u^SH Ti Dogs normally kept: inside kennel structure SOCIAL Kennel License Information: $150.00 (payment must accompany application) Name of Business _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 25.C 2'5» ( FECEIPT^Hm YOU ;i259J30 COOl ROl Tic 1W2C Business Activities : ________________ '■ ------rrrtTT----«am')(example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, r-tai , Normal Business Hours: After Hours Contact: (name)__ (phone) Dog runs/exercise areas are:inside outside boch The undersigned hereby makes ^his°f^^ grants the P^rSd^ at^ any other^ time during thelicense approval and at any , aorees to abide by the license duration? and chaoter 5 36 including any special co2!iltTo^^^mpo^^ "" license approval. Applicant Date ?or City Ose Only Kennel inspected by Date />' ' -? ^ Kecoi lends Approval )( _ Denial KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION c r tive January 1, 19j^ Owner y// /_►^ //L'^ to December 31, 19 / -, . / . O /?/y f\/ Prooerby Address: ^ A’'!? .<1 < .-r /tA /^_ (Include city and zip) J^A'/^ ^. -S'S~^<• Mailing Address (if different): Phone: (home)(work) wwgTpKWTTKennel License Information: $25.00 (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time (over 3 months of age) Principal Breed;c -> ^ -7’/s >41 . -)c- -^C/Z X Purpose for more than 2 dogs:^ Dogs normally kept: ^ inside kennel structure „ICIAL Kennel License Information: $150.00 (payment must accompany application) C y.< f . Name of Business: Business Activities; _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ i .-rrm"v*-(e.xample: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.; Normal Business Hours: After Hours Contact: (name)_ (phone) Dog runs/exercise areas are: — ClVf OF DROHQ FISmE OFFICE inside outside ..ni3500000 01 CEN 25. C 25.^ •he undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono i-cccjpj^rmK YOU 'ouncil for a Kennel License as specified on this form; q OOI ROl TU •Itv ordinance or other law or regulation: the undersigend hereby xants the City permisssion to inspect the premises pirior to icense approyal and at any other reasonable time during the ieense duration; and the undersigned agrees to abide by the ^emiremants of Municipal Coda Chapter 5.36 including any spe"»j; ■Seditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel .Icense approval. ' / 'C. / / S^licant Date or Cltv Pse Only annel inspectedby 3 03\ Recommends Approval ^ Denial Date - 9' ^'3 O^'iner: KSNNEL LICSNSE APPLICATION _ Effective January 1, 19 ^3 to December 31, 19_J^ ^ u T). Property Address: (include city and zip) 'Tn&O \AjffV2Ar/]. Mailing Address (if different): Phone: (home) C> j fwor'</'^-3y'7-7?^-r RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Information: (payment must accompany application) $25.00 Maximum No. of dogs to be )cept at one time: (over 3 months of age) /7f/yPrincipal Breed: Purpose for more than 2 dogs;_ _ Dogs normally )cept: - srm^ fl/££Pi Ifo/^esh )cennel structure COMMERCIAL Kennel License Information: $150.00 (payment must accompany application) Name of Business: Business t,^eed.ng. veterinary care, rerail-i^)(example: Normal Business Hours: After Hours Contact: (name) (phone) Dog runs/exercise areas are: fJTT DF OR&iQ FiNAiiCE OFFICE inside outside JJI3500000 01 CEH r.«r Q. 4b W a V ' both The undersigned hereby makes application to °^°"°3the -oun<-il for a Kennel License as specified on this form, the Tnd«esloned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only Sd doernot SSSt IS authority to violate any provision of any “?y OrdinancI or othL law or regulation; ^e undersigend hereby irants the City permisssion to inspect the premises prior to License approval 'pplic^t /Date 7 / ?or City Use Only fennel inspected by 6 ^Date /3 ~ cT" recommends Approval_Y— Denial, r KZNNEL LICENSE APPLICATION __ Effective January 1, 19^33 to December 31, "i Owner ZruLciU>V\ A. -Sp^ ( I 1 V » P) , ‘ =rooerty Address; Qr>n'I>*. oc, pqoajrvci ^ (include city and zxp^ Mailing Address (if different); Phone; (home) ^______ NOV ?. 0 1 (work) 33i-<*<-oo RBSIDBNTXAL Kennel License Information; $25.00 (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time;_3 (over 3 months of age) Principal Breed: 1- / t - Coctt^_ / >- ShU_l^v< Purpose for more than 2 dogs; p(e^Su4r Dogs normally kept;inside ^ kennel structure COMMERCIAL Kennel License xntormation: $150.00 (payment must accompany application) Name of Business: ?exi^pf^'°bclrdin|: veterinary care, retaU, ^ Normal Business Hours;_ _ _ _ _ After Hours Contact; (name)_ (phone) Dog runs/exercise areas are: ^3500000 01 GDi CHECK 7L inside outside ___both 25. \ 25.< RECEIFT-Vm YOU “1259200 cool m TL ll/2i Sfdo«rnot gwnt “rauthority to violate any provision of any i?Y OrdinancI or oth« law or regulation: ^e undersxgend hereby rants the City permisssion to inspect tbe premises prior to i“nse approval and at any other reasonable time during the 2 nn • and th0 uxidersi^nsd a^roBS to abxdo by the Si^s“im1ord^=bnie-c^ty “§^^^^^^^^ a7y icense approval. //-/9-9>- kant Date ir City Dse Only innel inspected by Date - y- :/ commends Aaproval )( _ Denial I Owner: KZNNEL LICENSE APPLICATION Effective January 1, 19 fcX. to December 31, 19 f^3 / Prooerty Address: SJore- (include city ana zip) / 'i/*>,_ _ _ _ _m.J Mailing Address (if different): Phone: (home)____^ "^1 "0 73 7 (work) ^3 RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Information: $25.00 (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. of dogs to be Icept at one tine: JZ (over 3 months of age) Principal Breed:tlA.Jt nr-4-^jn U_ _ _ _Q/ ^ MOV 3 0 Purpose for more than 2 dogs: Cogs normally )cept:inside Jcennel structure _JCIAL Kennel License Information: $150.00 (payment must accompany application) Name of Easiness: Business Activities: CITY OF OfM FINANCE OFFICE (example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, recai-, e>c 3500000.w# 7 -. - Normal Business Hours: nI UCHECK -RECEIFT-TimK YOl After Hou*s Contact: (name) (phone) f^259S70 COOi ROl 7:— n/: Dog runs/exercise areas are:inside outside both The undersigned hereby makes application to Council for a Kennel License as specified on this form, the SSd«signed acknowledges that a kennel license is permssrve only and doernot grant any authority to yiolate any provision of any City ^Ordinance or other law or regulation: ^e undersigend hereby grants the City permisssion to inspect the premises prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license approval. ■\pplicant Date For City Pse Only Icnnel inspected by Date /X" .Recommends Approval /Denial KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION Effective January 1, 19^1^ to Deceniber 31, 19^ Owner; jPoPrvVOI— ^ FT - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Property Address: \- (include city and zip) m Mailing Address (if different): 5^A<v\C Phone; (home) ____________ RBSIDBMTIAL Kennel License Information: 525.00 (payment must accompany app.’ ication) Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time (over 3 months of age) (work) Principal Breed:______________ Purpose for more than 2 dogs: Dogs normally kept: _ _ cm OF CW cTu\iirc nccTcct A«tniTvk. uf I 1311S00000 01 GEM 150. L CHECK 7L 150.: RECE!PT-rHM YOU 1260270 cool ROl Tli 1 -7 /A tt-f v~ inside kennel structure COMMERCIAL Kennel License Information: $_150_^r'O ^^£-x.x<iss2> (payment must accompany application) Name of Business t rvX:>RcCfe£. Business Aef.ivities: CogOc^Ax^ (example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.; Normal Business -........fV\-F ^ ^Pm After Hours Contact: (name) (phone) ahCo-_______- —. Dog runs/exercise areas are: inside - - -outside ^_^^both •he undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City :ouncil for a Kennel License as specified on this form; the ndersigned acknowledges that a cennel license is nd does not grant any authority to violate any provision of ^ ity ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigend hereby rants the City permisssion to inspect the premises . icense approval and at any other reasonable time during the ie«nee duration; and the undersigned agrees to abide by th i;iu±r«fliOTts of Municipal Code Chapter 5.3S including My oSditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel icense approval. Applicant 1 T^<r^svNP=»zf-'Pf\Z Date ?or city Use Only J>Kennel inspected by ___ Recommends Approval X Denial Date 971 Date: To: From: Subject: December 3, 1992 Ron Moorse, City Administrator Steve Sullivan, Chief of Police Liquor License Renewal - Jimmies Lounge A thorough bac): round investigation has been conducted involving Jimmies Lounge and its owner, Jimmie Holtz. As there has not been any reported incidents against Mr. Holtz or the liquor establishment, I have no objection to the issuance of this license. Date:To:From:Subject:December 3, 1992 Ron Moorse, City Administrator Steve Sullivan, Chief of Police Liquor License Renewal - Navarre LiquorsA thorouqh background investigation has been conducted involving Navarre Liquors and its owner, Mr. Steve Corl. As there has not been any reported incidents against Mr. Corl or the liquor establishment, I have no objection to the issuance of this license. Date:December 10, 1992 To: From: Subject: Ron Moorse, City Administrator Steve Sullivan, Chief of Police Liquor License Renewal - Wayzata Country Club A background investigation has been conducted on Mr. John Downey, and records have been reviewed regarding the Wayzata Country Club. No liquor violations have been found. I have no objection to the liquor license being renewed for this establishment. Date: To: From: Subject: December 10, 1992 Ron Moorse, City Administrator Steve Sullivan, Chief of Police Liquor License Renewal - Woodhill Country Club A background investigation has been conducted on Mr. Mark Albrecht, and records have been reviewed regarding the Woodhill Country Club. No liquor violations have been found. I have no objection to the liquor license being renewed for this establishment. Date: To: Fr om: Subject: December 10, 1992 Ron Moorse, City Administrator Steve Sullivan, Chief of Police Liquor License Renewal - O'Sullivans Texaco A background investigation has been conducted on Mr. John O'Sullivan, and records have been reviewed regarding O'Sullivans Texaco. No violations have been found. I have no objection to the liquor license being renewed for this establishment. Date: To: From: Subject: December 3, 1992 Ron Moorse, City Administrator Steve Sullivan, Chi<'f of Police Liquor License Renewal - Orono Golf Course A review has been made involving any possible alcohol violations at the Orono Golf Course. As no violations were found, I have no objection to the issuance of this license. ■" •» 1992 OROAfO f 4., HAPPY >ty * fi HOLIDAYS 11/22/82 CB PRREQ PREQOREHP • NAME P R ANDERSON. BRUCE L BOBZIEN, SUE A BORIS. SCOTT W 60SMA. JAMIE L BRINKHAUS. JOHN F CARLSON. STEPHEN C CHESWICK, GARY B CORNICK. JAMES L DEMBOUSKI^ JAY C ENGLISH lil. IRVING ERICKSON, KURT R ERLER^ JAMES fischEnich. dan T FRITZLER, iOHN M GAFFRON, MICHAEL GERHARDSON. JOHN GOMAN. DAVID J GREGORY, JAMES D HALLIN, DOROTHY M HANSEN. STEVEN C HANSINQ, CAROL J HASEMAN, CAROLE JOHNSON, BRADLEY P KENNEN. JANICE M KNUTSON. CHARLOTTE KUEHN. THOMAS M MABUSTH, JEANNE A MCNICHOLS, DAVID L MOORSE. RONALD J MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES NELSON, DAVID D OBERAIQNER. SCOTT G OBRIEN. RANDY L OMAN. LYLE E PALMER. GREGORY A QUAST, WAYNE A RATHBUN. BARRY J SCHOENHOFF, JOHN B SKREEN. DALE S STEFFENHAGEN. RONAL SULLIVAN. STEPHEN X THOMTON, MARK R TOMCHECK, LAWRENCE TOMCZYK, MARK W VANG, BRUCE L VEE, LINDA S WALTERS, LINDA G 471688060 474S63339 476921819 471840871 475443862 476663143 472503991 469S26026 475989721 468821018 472529007 388221145 468701868 507585424 469686562 468420832 469087884 474667812 475380151 477500666 475444249 477463877 471569863 475604753 504260307 472500574 121262417 480843542 477700023 334506281 477028779 468909535 476783251 470700901 469848107 475382983 473746173 470566529 469629194 475569177 267460042 472563051 474663296 470704904 475505292 468629488 500403192 47788:539 WECKMAN. STEPHEN J YTDDPT GROSS31 39696 573* 23963 5831 6265 4912 14126.40 42 37613 58 61 5458 25 31 40832 5131 42369.86 31 33885 01 31 39874 63 CURRENTGROSS 12/31/92 PR CM PRREGOR1755987309609 1568 448 1680 1579 1332 1524 36520083 56 00 97 48 15 38 31 36578 04 1526 40 13 100.00 100 00 31 41365 91 1607 03 31 39632 25 1646.96 33 34387 16 1434 02 42 47925.06 1885.69 35 3627.35 191 21 42 31200.38 1128 80 12 29621 57 1235 28 42 27546.81 1241 19 31 13442.96 510 96 12 20575 69 888.72 31 37595 65 1497.84 31 5764 43 234 57 A 15 23680 23 987 52 15 50587 40 2109 60 33 43063 58 1795.83 31 22140 59 1226.70 12 52242.65 2249 92 31 39506.82 1497.84 35 4610.95 119 07 I 42 25634 80 1077.22 92 27962 89 1212 46 33 34387.00 1434.01 42 25509 10 1001.60 92 33507.67 1329 77 92 27802 74 1054 33 31 7234 72 533 54 42 26980 58 1013.21 D 93 29622.78 1235.28 31 46777.45 2004.08 31 35664.71 1469.28 F 31 37018.53 1542.74 31 36405.45 1497.84 33 29621.54 1235.29 12 22919.15 982.05 15 26970.39 1145.29 33 25233 01 1088.00 57.766 39 sasasBssasxBS CMP •NAME DPT YTDGROSS CURRENTGROSS 477361665 BUTLER. MRY C 11 2900.04 241.67 469188026 CALLAHAN. EDWARD J 11 2900.04 241.67 18324677 GOETTEN. J.DIANN 11 2900.04 241.S7 473646272 JABBOUR, GABRIEL 11 2900.04 241.67 469605135 PETERSON, BARBARA A 11 3600.00 300.00 1,266.68 «■ a c ■ as 12/31/92 PR CB PRREGOREHP • NAME 47168I060 469526026 47S969721 466I21016 472529007 46I701I6I 471569163 410643542 334506261 472563051 474663296 470704904 •M -JYTOGROSSCURRENTGROSS ANDERSON, BRUCE L CORNICK, JAMES L DEMBOUSKI, JAY C ENGLISH 111, IRVING ERICKSON, KURT R FISCHENICN. DAN T JOHNSON, BI^ADLEY P MCNICHOLS, DAVID L MOROWCZVNSKI, JAMES THOMTON, MARK R TOMCHECK, LAWRENCE F TOMCZVK, HARK W 41375 43986 35169 41490 37186 42982 39243.27 23053.49 41154 35611 38634 38053 61 07 01 84 60 12 44 64 74 07 1679 1616 1284 16ir 610 1616 1647 912 1647 146 1616.21 1647.62 04 21 00 21 56 21 62 90 62 93 16,041.13 1.1 12/06/92 PR CB PRREGOREMP i NAME 471688060 474563J39 476921819 471840871 475443862 476663143 472503991 469S26026 475989721 468821018 472529007 468701868 507585424 469686562 468420832 469087884 474667812 475380151 477500666 475444249 477463877 471569863 <77647279 475604753 504260307 472500574 121262417 480843542 477700023 334506281 477028779 468909535 476783251 470700901 469848107 475382983 473746173 470566529 469629194 475569177 267460042 472563051 472563051 474663296 470704904 475505292 4R8629488 500403192 477881539 DPT ANDERSON. BRUCE L 31 BOBZIEN. SUE A 3i BORIS. SCOTT W 31 BOSMA, JAMIE L 12 BRINKHAUS. JOHN F 42 CARLSON. STEPHEN C 61 CHESWICK. GARY B 31 CORNICK. JAMES L 31 DEMBOUSKI. JAY C 31 ENGLISH III. IRVING 31 ERICKSON. KURT R 31 FISCHENICH. DAN T 31 FRITZLER. JOHN M 31 QAFFRON. MICHAEL P 33 GERHAROSON. JOHN R 42 GOMAN. DAVID J 35 GREGORY. JAMES D 42 HALL IN. DOROTHY M 12 HANSEN. STEVEN C 42 HANSING. CAROL J 31 HASEMAN. CAROLE 12 JOHNSON. BRADLEY P 31 KARNITZ. RICKY 0 31 KENNEN. JANICE M 31 KNUTSON. CHARLOTTE A 15 KUEHN. THOMAS M 15 MABUStH, JEANNE A 33 MCNICHOLS, DAVID L 31 MOORSE. RONALD J 12 MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES 31 NELSON. DAVID D 35 OBERAIQNER. SCOTT Q 42 OBRIEN, RANDY L 92 OMAN. LYLE E 33 PALMER. GREGORY A 42 QUAST. WAYNE A 92 RATHOLN. BARRY J 92 SCH0E‘:H0FF. JOHN B 31 SKREEN. DALE S 42 STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD 93 SyiAiyAN. STEPHEN X 31 THOMTON. MARK R 31 IiJ2i?TON. HARK R 31 TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F 31 TOMCZYK. mark W 31 VANG, BikuCE L 33 VEE, LINDA S 12 WALTERS. LINDA G * is WECKMAN. STEPHEN J 33 YTD GROSS 43150.05 24951.10 6656.89 14696.89 39182.14 5682.25 42513.47 45455.35 36453.01 43010.62 38724.54 44726.89 41279.21 35821.17 50045.75 3796.70 32329.19 30856.85 28560.01 14008.48 21464.41 41040.68 3681.23 5954.62 24667.76 52697.00 44859.41 24337.25 54692.57 43064.19 4771.85 26711.52 29096.28 35821.01 26660.94 35236.35 28857.06 7648.72 27993.79 30858.07 48781.53 36546.28 38015.57 40177.48 39622.31 30856.83 23857.24 28001.15 26321.01 CURRENT GROSS 1774.44 987.52 391.40 570.49 1568.56 224.00 1680.98 1488.28 1284.00 1519.78 1535.94 1744.77 1646.96 1434.01 2120.69 169.35 1128.81 1235.28 1013.20 565.52 888.72 1797.41 82 190 987 2109 , 1795.83 1283.76 2449.92 1909.75 160.90 1078.72 1133.39 1434.01 1151.84 1728.68 1054.32 412.00 1013.21 1235.29 2004.08 734.64 1469.29 1542.74 1569.24 1235.29 938.09 1030.76 1088.00 59,572.90 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED. DEC 9, 1992. 9:55 PM P«9* 1ECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNTNUMBER INVOICE NO PONUMBER MANUAL 26672 1992/12/14 S14.22 A T 4 T TELEPHONE 0549-4320 000129 OH <•>$14.22* 26673 1992/12/14 $72,884 00 ALLIED MECHANICAL SYSTEMS MECH SYSTEMS ALL BLDG^0480-4520 000163 OH <•>$72,894 Oj* 26674 1992/12/14 $1,260.00 AMERECT INC STEEL CITY HALL 0480-4520 9837 OH 1992/12/14 $630 00 AHERECT INC STEEL POLICE BLDG 0483-4520 9837 OH1992/12/14 $900.00 AMERECT INC STEEL PUB WKS BLDG 0484-4520 9837 OH <•>$2,790.00*— 2667S 1992/12/14 $42.65 AT 4 T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC 0129-4340 5193933283 OH 1992/12/14 $26.16 AT 4 T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC 0069-4340 5193935102 OH 1992/12/14 $26.16 AT A T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC 0249-4340 5193935102 OH 1992/12/14 $26.16 AT 4 T I1;F0 SYSTEM DATA PROC 0129-4340 5193935102 OH 1992/12/14 $26.16 AT 4 T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC 0059-4340 5193935102 OH 1992/12/14 $26.16 AT 4 T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROC 0174-4340 5193935102 OH <•>$173.45* 26676 1992/12/14 $4,019.92 BARTON SAND/QRAVEL SAND 0249-4233 000133 OH <«>$4,018.82* 26677 1992/12/14 $4,347 46 BITUMINOUS CONSULTING 4 C MCCULLY RD FINAL 0354-4530 000132 OH <*>$4,347.46* 26678 1992/12/14 $856.92 BITUMINOUS ROADWAY INC WINTER MIX 0249-4233 063427 OH <•>$856.92* 26C79 1992/12/14 $500.00 BLACKOWIAK 4 SONS LEAF REMOVAL 0295-4348 000130 OH 1992/12/14 $75.22 BLACKOWIAK 4 SONS TRASH HAUL 0099-4343 000131 OH1992/12/14 $139.46 BLACKOWIAK 4 SONS TRASH HAUL 0290-4343 000131 OH <•>$714.69* 26610 1992/12/14 $28.39 BLITZ ONE HR FOTO PHOTO FINISH 0129-4210 03104 OH <•>$29.39* 26611 1992/12/14 $11.31 BOYER TRUCK PARTS PARTS 0249-4232 181919 OH <•>$11.31* 26692 1992/12/14 $319.61 BOYER TRUCKS PARTS 0249-4232 75967M OH <•>$319.61* 26693 1992/12/14 $39.88 BUDGET PRINTING ALARM CAROS 0129-4322 33399 OH <•>$39.88* 26694 1992/12/14 $148 97 CELLULARONE TELEPHONE 0129-4320 000135 OH 1992/12/14 $25.66 CELLULARONE TELEPHONE 0249-4320 000135 OH <•>$174.63* 26695 1992/12/14 $69.11 CITY OF LONG LAKE LIFT STATION 0569-4344 000145 OH1992/12/14 $16.95 CITY OF LONG LAKE FLASHER 0249-4325 000145 OH <•>$86.06* 26696 1992/12/14 $11,569.45 CITY OF MAPLE PLAIN FIRE SERVICE 0131-4316 000169 OH P«9« 135;ACCOUNTNUMBER COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED. DEC 9. 1^92. 8:55 PM page 2INVOICE NO NUMBER MANUAL0549-4320 000129 OH0480-4520 000163 OH0480-4520 9837 OH0483-4520 9837 OHA A0484-4520 9837 OH0129-4340 5193933283 OH0069-4340 5193935102 OH0249-4340 5193935102 OH0129-4340 5193935102 OH0059-4340 5193935102 OH0174-4340 5193935102 OH0249-4233 000133 OH0354-4530 000132 OH0249-4233 063427 OH 0295-4348 000130 OH 0099-4343 000131 OH 0290-4343 000131 OH 0129-4210 03104 OH 0249-4232 181919 0249-4232 75967M 0129-4322 33399 0129-4320 000135 0249-4320 000135 0569-4344 000145 0249-4325 000145 0131-4316 000169 OH OH ACCOUNTlECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION NUMBER INVOICE NO NUMBER MANUAL<•>611,569.45*26617<*>1992/12/14 $259.256259.25*CONNELLY INDUSTRIAL REPAIR SOFTNER 0S49'4342 2569 OH266SS<•>1992/12/14 6147.506147.50*CTSYSTEMS REPAIR SOFTNER 0549-4345 1911 OH26619<•>1992/12/14 644.30644.30*CULLIOAN WATER SOFTNER 0099-4343 000134 OH26690<•>1992/12/14 6131.966131.96*CUr^lINS ALLISON PLASTIC BAGS 0129-4210 517861 OH26691<*>1992/12/14 613,995.00613,995.00*DALE TILE COMPANY ALL BLOGS TILE 4 SLATE 0480-4520 000159 OH26692<•>1992/12/14 630.00630.00*DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY BOILER Lie 0249-4383 000136 OH26693<•>1942/12/14 659.53659.53*DiKIE PETRO-CHFM ACID 0549-4234 00944548 OH26694<•>1992/12/14 65,265.0065,265.00*E-Z RECYCLING NOV RECYCLE FEE 0295-4392 000525 OH 26695 <•> 1992/12/14 655.38 655.38* EARL F ANDERSON ASSC PARKING LOT SIGN 0480-4511 00120792 OK 26696 <•> 1992/12/14 6194.00 6194.00* ELMER J PETERSON CO PUMP SEPTIC 0099-4343 000170 OH 26697 <*> 1992/12/14 667.71 667.71* FEED RITE CONTROLS CHLORINE 0549-4234 4462 OH 26691 <•> 1992/12/14 644.16 644.16* FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL PART 0549-4234 1315 OH 26699 1992/12/14 610.24 Q & K SERVICES UNIFORM 0590-4221 000139 OH1992/12/14 615.17 Q 4 K SERVICES UNIFORMS 0569-4221 000139 OH1992/12/14 645.51 Q 4 K SERVICES UN^FCJRMS 0549-4221 000139 OH1992/12/14 690.06 Q 4 K SERVICES RUQb 0129-4343 000139 OH <•> 1992/12/14 6271.64 6432.62* Q 4 K SERVICES UNIFORMS 0249-4221 000139 OH 26700 1992/12/14 6665.72 GENUINE PARTS CO SUPPLIES 0249-4232 000138 OH1992/12/14 64.71 GENUINE PARTS CO SUPPLIES 0290-4232 000138 OH1992/12/14 610.94 GENUINE PARTS CO SUPPLIES 0549-4234 000138 OH1992/12/14 6341.87 GENUINE PARTS CO SUPPLIES 0569-4232 000138 OH <*> 1992/12/14 -67.88 61,015.36* GENUINE PARTS CO SUPPLIES 0569-4342 000138 OH 26701 <*> 1992/12/14 688,860.00 688.860.00* GEPHARDT ELECTRIC ELECTRICAL ALL BLDGS 0480-4520 000164 OH 0549-4342 2569 OH0549-4345 1911 OH0099-4343 000134 OH0129-4210 517861 OH0480-4520 000159 OH0249-4383 000136 OH0549-4234 00944548 OH0295-4392 000525 OH COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED. DEC 9. 1992, 8:55 PM past 4CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT26717 <*>26718 <•>26719<•>26720 26722 <•> 26723 <•> 26724 <•> 26725 <•> 26726 1902/12/141992/12/141992/12/141992/12/141992/12/141992/12/141992/12/141992/12/141992/12/141992/12/141992/12/141992/12/141992/12/141992/12/141992/12/14 1992/12/14 1992/12/14 1992/12/14 1992/12/14 1002/12/14 1002/12/14 1992/12/14 1992/12/14 1002/12/14 1992/12/14 1092/12/14 1092/12/14 1992/12/14 1992/12/14 1902/12/14 $8,058.60*$424.30 $944.20 $2.354.60 $753.00 $1,370.30 $502.00 $239.04 $358.56 $6,946.00*MEDICAMEDICAMEDICAMEDICAMEDICAMEDICAMEDICAMEDICA VENDORCHOICECHOICECHOICECHOICECHOICECHOICECHOICECHOICE DESCRIPTION$7.03.'.00 $7,037 00*MET-CON METRO INC$350.00$350.00*MICHAEL HINZMAN$47.407.5u$47,407.50-MIDWEST ASPHALT$77 93 $41.77 $41.76 $41.77 $177.96 $41.77 MIDWESTMIDWESTMIDWESTMIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST BSNS PROD BSNS PROD BSNS PROD BSNS PROD BSNS PROD BSNS PROD$422.96* $518.37 $47.99 $37.97 $390.13 $994.46* $157.74 $157.74* $24.98 $24.98* $410.18 $410.18* $31.50 $31.50* MINNEGASCO MINNEGASCO MINNEGASCO MINNEGASCO MINNESOTA CONWAY MN BENEFIT ASSN DEC INS DEC INS DEC INS DEC INS DEC INS DEC INS DEC INS DEC INSPUB WIKS BLDG PRE FABTRAINING CLASSPARKING L0TS-FACIL:TIESOFFICEOFFICEOFFICEOFFICE OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIESSUPPLIESSUPPLIESSUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES PART DEC INS MN DEPT OF NATL RESOURCES LANDSCAPE TREES MPLS OXYGEN CO $7,110.00 MULCAHY INC $4,163.00 MULCAHY INC $5,400.00 MULCAHY INC $4,617.00 MULCAHY INC $1,061.00 MULCAHY INC $22,351.00* DEMURRAGE CITY HALL EIFS/DRYWALL POLICE EIFS/D.RYWALL PUB WKS EIFS/DRYWALL ALL BLDGS COil ALL BLDGS CO 42 ACCOUNTmUMBER INVOICE NO PONUMBER MANUAL0174-4151 22102552 OK0039-4151 22102552 OH0129-4151 22102552 OH0249-4151 22102552 OH9001-1298 22102552 OH0069-4151 22102552 OH0549-4151 22102552 OH0569-4151 22102552 OH0484-4520 000162 OH0129-4356 000143 OH0480-4511 000154 OH0069-4210 000149 OH0039-4210 000149 OH0174-4210 000149 OH 0249-4210 000149 OH 0129-4210 000149 OH 0059-4210 000149 OH 0099-4324 000148 OH0129-4324 000148 OH 0549-4324 000148 OH0569-4324 000148 OH 0290-4231 23443 OH 0129-4152 000150 OH 0480-4511 000147 OH 0249-4232 3644610 OH 0480-4520 000166 OH 0483-4520 000166 OH 0484-4520 000166 OH 0480-4520 000166 OH 0480-4520 000166 OH iM:Ii1W.T1I iViIil i»Iil •HIkliHi •Iilct iWT.t- •I*VlIiIi page 6lUAL COUNCIL CHECK REQISTEK WED, DEC 0, 1992. 8;5S PHCHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR*46.67*WECKMAN STEPHEN WRIGHT HENN ELECTRIC YOCUM OIL CO INCZAHL EQUIPMENT CO ZAHL EQUIPMENT CO ZAHL EQUIPMENT CO page 7ACCOUNTDESCRIPTION<•>*46.67*267S2<•>1992/12/14**23.93*23.93*26753<•>1992/12/14 *7.99*7.99*26754<•>1992/12/14 *811.64*811.64*26755<•>1992/12/141992/12/141992/12/14 *5,576 34 *5,117.33 *12,673.50 *23.367.17*AIR COMPRESSOR 20 HP PRESURE WASHER/ATTACH GRACO LUBE EQUIPMENT NUMBER INVOICE NO NUMBER MANUAL0174-4381 000180 OH0249-4324 000181 OH0249-4220 000182 OH0484-4560 34271 OH0484-4560 34271 OH0484-4560 34616 OH*504,735.62* fglih- ^i ^1 > »»• & §g t,l i COUNCIL MEETING DEC 1 4 1992 CSTV'OFORONa TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Ron Moorse, City Administrator DATE:December 10, 1992 SUBJECT: City Facilities Budget tipdate The city facilities budget as of No -ember 6, 1 992, included a contingency amount of $8,561.00. When the budget was updated as of November 18 the contingency amount had been reduced to a negative $19,943.00. The major items causing this change were as follows: 1. Cost to increase the elevation in the public works yard area by 8 inches to match the salt and sand storage building elevation: $13,400. This additional cost is currently in dispute with the site contractor. The Construction Manager believes a major portion of this cost was included in prior contracts or change orders. 2. The cost to pave the floor of the salt and sand storage building: $2,900.00. This is not an unplanned cost, but it is not included in the salt and sand storage building contract price. 3. Cost for additional plywood for public works facia: $5,843.00. Revisions to the public works building concerning general carpentry resulted in the elimination of approximately $30,000 in plywood costs. Fine tuning of the revisions have resulted in the $5,843.00 being added back into the budget. 4. Revisions to council ceiling framing: $6,261.00. The framing contractor has indicated he did not pick up the actual amount of framing from the building plans. The architect indicates the contractor should have picked up the framing and should not be eligible for an add. This issue is still in dispute. 5. Shelves in the administration front counter: $1,122.00. The original plans for the administration service counter had minimal shelving. This additional shelving provides for efficient storage of materials frequently requested by the public and eliminates the need for alternate means of storage. 6. Roof edge caulking: $2,220.00. Because the completion of the roof on the administrative buildings was delayed, the ice and water shield was applied to all three of the buildings to enable a water tight roof so that inside work could progress. This resulted in some water leaks at the soffit area. The caulking was required to resolve the leak problem. The construction manager and architect are following up to determine whether the leaks were the result of improper installation. The most recent update of the facilities budget (12/1/92) shows the contingency amount further reduced to a neqative $32,092.00. The major items causing this change were as follows: 1. Revisions to police case work: $3,500.00. The original police building plans included $5,500.00 for case work in the clerical office area. This total amount was eliminated by the architect without authorization by the City. $3,500.00 of this case work was added back to provide work space and storage. 2. Revisions to door locks: $933.00. A number of doors did not have correct locks in the initial hardware plan. This is a cost of changing and/or adding locks. 3. Flag pole light: $881.00. 4. Installation of light pole at the salt and sand storage building: $6,177.00. The light for the salt and sand mixing area was originally attached to the cold storage building. When the cold storage building was deferred a free standing light was necessary. This is the cost for providing electricity and installing a light for the salt and sand mixing area. 5. Emergency generator connection: $644.00. This the external connection for a portable emergency generator for the public works building. The updated contingency amount includes $63,000.00 for the cold storage building and $8,000.00 for the police security camera system which have both been deferred. If both of these were to be eliminated, the "contingency" amount would be a positive $38,908. 0^^ ^__ ______ "is Uf^MS. CVe^u/^ M<JLt 7^j04*A^. Ttli^ . r DEC 1 0 199? December 7,1992 Marcy Shapiro, Director West Hennepin Human Services 41st & Vernon Ave. S. St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Dear Marcy, I regretfully inform you that I am resigning from the Board of Directors effective immediately. It has been my pleasure to have served for the past two years with you, the staff and fellow board members. My experience working with WHHS has been extremely enriching, both personally and professionally. Lately. I have felt somewhat frustrated by not having more time to give as an active board member. My current schedule does not permit me to serve on the committee and subcommittees, which are such an integral part of the board duties. Most of my evenings are taken up with personal and family activities and I am especially aware of my desire to spend more time with my sons during the next couple of years. I am confident that the current staff and board are on the right track in serving the needs of the community. You are a dynamic and progressive organization and I will miss working with you. Sincerely, David Use cc: Ron Morse, Administrator Orono City Council d PERMITS ISSUuu, TEL^ COLF.ECILU NOVEMBER 1092REpOflT NIR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OP RUN 12/02/92 PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO PAGE; 1REQUESTER: CAROLE PERMIT TYPE Building SQL FAMILY-NEW SF-AOO/REMOOEL SF-ACC STRUCTURE DEMO/PRINCIPAL COM-AOO/REMOOEL INSTITUTION-NEW DEMO-ACCESSORY ACC/QARAQES UNDEFINED Sub-total Mtcbanlcal HEATING SYSTEMS AIR CONDITIONING FIREPLACE QAS LINE INSPECTDUCT WORK ONLY Sub-total Plumbing FIXTURES Sub-total Sowar A Wator SEWER CONNECTION WATER CONNECTION NEW SEPTIC SYSTE SEWER A WATER Sub-total Flro FIRE SPRINKLER Sub-total Utor Doflnod LAND ALTERATION Sub-total Grand-total QTY 4 II 3 i 1 1 i 1 0 30* -- CURRENT RANGE - 11/01/92 - 11/30/92 BASE FEE 6.224.00 5.059.00 117.00 50.00 135.00 4.273.50 30.00 252.00 0.00 16,140.50* VALUATION 1.500.200 00 720.690.00 6,120.00 0.00 12,000.00 1.366.077.00 0.00 25,000.00 0.00 3.630.087.00* 13 645.00 0.00145.00 0.007225.00 0.00260.00 0.001 24* 30.00 1,005.00*0.00 0.00* 9 818.00 0.009*818.00*0 00- 1 30.00 0.00130.00 0.001100.00 0.0000.00 0.003*160.00*0.00* 0 .0.00 0.000*0.00*0.00* 3 150.00 0.003*150.00*0.00* 69**18.273.50**3.630.087.00- PLAN REVIEW 4.045 62 3.139.53 76.05 0.00 87 . 2.777. 0. 163. 0. 10.290. 75 78 00 80 00 53* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0t>* 0.00 0.00* 0 0o 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 ^ 0.00 0.00* 0.00 0.00* QTY 1 13 2 0 0 0 0 3 1 20* 4 0 0 00 4* 44* 0 00 1 1* 1 1* 10.290.53** 0 0* 30** -- PREVIOUS RANGE - 11/01/91 - 11/30/91 BASE FEE 650 00 2.297.00 333.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 252.00 150.00 3.682.00* VALUATION 103.OOC 00 257.700.00 30,552.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19,000.00 0.00 410,252.00* PLAN REVIEW 422.50 1.301.31 216.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 163.80 0.00 2.104.06* 165.00 0 00 0.000.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.00165.00*0.00*0.00* 235.00 0.00 0.00235.00*0.00*0.00* 0 00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.0060.00 0.00 0.0060.00*0.00*0.00* 84 00 3.600.00 42.0084.00*3.800.00*42.00* 0.00 0.00 0.000.00*0.00*0.00* 4.226.00*«413.852.00**2.146.06** PEHMITS jUEU/FEES COLLECTED NOVEMBER 1992 Page 2REPORT HBR. BFEERPTl-1 DATE OF RUN 12/02/02 •• PERMIT FEE REPORT •• CITY OF ORONO FROM 11/01/92 TO 11/30/92 REPORT NBR. BFEERPTl-1 DATE OF RUN 12/02/82 *• PERMIT FEE REPORT •• CITY OF ORONO FROM 11/01/92 TO 11/30/92 PAGE; 29REQUESTER; CAROLE BUILDING MECHANICAL PLUMBING SEWER & WATER USER SIGN FIRE BASE FEE 16,140.50 1,005.00 818.00 160.00 150.00 0.00 0.00 PLAN i.cVIEW 10.290.53 0.00 0 00 0 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SURCHARGE 1,779.45 12.00 4.50 1.50 0.00 0.00 U.OO Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 0.00 0 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SAC 1,400.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 143.00 120.00 0.00 0 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MAIL IN SEWER CONNECTION 910.60 18.50 3.00 PERMIT TOTAL 30,664.08 1,155.50 825.50 161.50 150.00 0.00 0.00 PAGE: 30 REQUESTER: CAROLE REPORT TOTAL BASE FEE PLAN REVIEW SURCHARGE Lie. SEARCH FEE SAC INVESTIGATION DEPOSIT HAIL IN SEWER CONNECTION PERMIT TOTAL 18,273.50 10.290.53 1,797.45 0.00 1.400.00 263.00 0.00 21.50 910.60 32,956.56 WED. DEC. 2. 1992, 3:27 PHPERMITS ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER 1992PERMIT WORK ADDR NBR STREET ISSUED PERMIT NfaR PAGE I: ID NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM VALUATION 14736010 HARRIS CONSTRUCTION 195.200.00 14750548 JENSEN HOMES MACKE 875,000.0014203357RICHWOOD R C KALOW 250.000.00 00000000 NA 180,000.0015443062ALL SQUARE INC BREUER 56,200.00 14730378 RIGHT ANGLE BUILDING CORP KYLE 26,000.0014425611JASPER HOMES CHARLTON 30,000.00 18948044 CASEY TOMPKINS L’ALLIER 160.000.00 14359524 ORFIELD r!£MODELING ST. LAWRENCE 20,000.0017504374SMITH CONSTRUCTION CO INC MODARES 120,000.00 00000000 NA HICKEY 25,000.0015429058VAN HEEL BROS CONSTRUCTION HITE 15,750.00ooooooor*NA SHEPHARD 4,000.0000000000NASTl .OW 1,650.0000000000NADOWNEY2,000.0018238045SELA ROOFING ANDREWS 3,490.00 18693746 WEATHEROUT CO VANWRINKLE 1,700.00 00000000 NA NISKA 1,120.0000000000NAGARLOCK1,000.0019372987STEPHEN LONGMAN BLDRS INC CORNELIUS .0000000000NANISKA.00 00000000 NA 12,000.00 13327281 KRAUS ANDERSON CONSIRUCTIO 1,366,077.0018253471REAL ESTATE UPDATERS SAPA 1,500.0017291944GARDNER A ASSOCIATES SIMONSON 45,000.0014746644SMITH CONSTRUCTIOh CO INC MODARIS 1,200.0000000000NALUNIESKI23,000.00 00000000 NA VICKERMAN 30,000.0019390808PARAGON DESIGNER & BLDRS MOORE 180,000.00 14768403 LUCAS DESIGN WORKS KIRBY 3,200.00 382568R7 WELTER RAY HTQ CO OMLIE .00ooooooonNABERTELSON.0000000000NASAPA.00 39414211 KLEVE HTG & AC WAADE .00 348307/7 LONDON BRICK BENNETT .00 34987883 MASTER HTG & COOLING WHITE .0038693213^IDLAND HTG & AC INC BRANTINGHAM .0038666039HAFNER NELSON MASONRY INC MACMILLAN .0038940005BURNSVILLE HEATING CO HITE .00 34789558 DITT'^R INC BRUER .0036332561FIRESIDE CORNER WHITE .00 35595900 MIDWEST FIREPLACE CO .0034718272B&C HEATING INC .00 34432819 NARKIE HTG & AC INC WENKSTERN .0039296767VOGT FRED & CO DAYTON .00 24738793 CITYVIEW PLBG & HTG BELL .0034461299COUNTRYSIDE HTG & COOLING THOMSON .00 34718272 BJ.C HEATING INC KOLLENBERG .0039203800CRONSTROMS HTG & AC INC .0039296767VOGT FRED A CO MOORISON .0039296767VOGT FRED & CO LYMAN .00 24738793 CITVVIEW PLBG & HTQ JACOBS .00 30C 01 443S WOLVERTON PL 01 165S FOX ST 01 2535 OLD BEACH RD 01 3300 BAYSIDE RD 02 275 HOLLANDER RD 02 1140 TONKAWA RD 02 2310 ABINGDON WAY 02 2684 LYDIARO AVE 02 253 CYGNET PL 02 2480 OLD BEACH RD 03 2485 DUNWOOOY AVE 05 2475 COUNTRYSIDE DR 06 2177 SHADYWOOD RD 06 4330 NORTH SHORE OR 06 2665 CASCO POINT RD 11 1340 BALOUR PARK RD 11 1421 NORTH ARM DR 15 2304 SHADYWOOD RD 15 1179 Ei.MWOOO AVE 16 960 TONKAWA RD 17 2*»«4 SHADYWOOD RD 19 *' WAYZATA BLVD W 20 :>5L KELLEY PKWY 29 J015 LINDEN LA 29 1065 EDGEWOOO HILLS R( 29 2480 OLD REACH RO 29 1020 TOWNlINE RO 29 2475 DUNWOOOY AVE 29 801 TONKAWA RD 29 1020 BROWN RD N 30C 01 186^ SHADYWOOD RO 01 760 TONKAWA RD 01 1015 LINDEN LA 01 998 WILDHURST TR 01 315 TONKAWA RD 01 4355 BAYSIDE RD 01 3185 6TH AVE N 01 387 ORONC ORCHARD RD 02 ’475 COUNTRYSIDE OR 02 275 HOLLANDER RD 02 4355 BAYSIDE RO 19 1955 SHORELINE DR 19 3420 SHORELINE DR 24 710 NORTH SHORE DR W 24 2465 FRENCH LAKE RD 24 325 BROWN RO S 24 4750 NORTH SHOKE OR 24 3775 TOGO RD 24 645 TONKAWA RD 24 801 TONKAWA RD 24 715 FERNDALE RD N 29 1700 SHORELINE DR 92/11/02 OR 92/11/30 OR 92/11/24 OR 92/11/25 OR 92/11/04 OR 92/11/12 OR 92/11/12 OR 92/11/30 OR 92/11/23 OR 92/11/30 OR 92/11/05 OR 92/11/03 OR 92/11/05 OR 92/11/05 OR 92/11/05 OR 92/11/12 OR S', 11/1? OR 92/11/5 OR 92/11/12 OR 92/11/19 OR 92/11/30 OR 92/11/19 OR 92/11/03 OR 92/11/02 OR 92/11/20 OR 92/11/06 OR 92/11/12 OR 92/11/20 OR 92/11/18 OR 92/11/23 OR ■004752 -004802 -004819 -004826 -004761 -004777 -004782 -004809 -004810 -004811 -004775 -004759 -004762 -004768 -004772 -004788 -004789 -004739 -004793 -004807 -004829 -004808 -004646 -004756 -004758 -004778 -004784 -004797 -004805 -004813 92/11/09 OR 92/11/02 OR 92/11/02 OR 92/11/04 OR 92/11/13 OR 92/11/18 OR 92/11/24 OR 92/11/30 OR 92/11/24 OR 92/11/25 OR 92/11/30 OR 92/11/12 OR 92/11/13 OR 92/11/04 OR 92/11/05 OR 92/11/06 OR 92/11/12 OR 92/11/13 OR 92/11/23 OR 92/11/24 OR 92/11/25 OR 92/11/08 OR -004736 -004765 -004767 -004771 -004796 -004806 -004823 -004830 -004820 -004828 -004831 -004790 -004794 -004774 -004778 -004780 -004787 -004795 -004817 -004824 -004827 -004779 WED. DEC 2. 1992. 3:28 PMPERMITS ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER 1992STREET ISSUED PERMIT NBR ID NUMBER COMPANY PAGE 2 ME 29 270 29 1700 24C 24C PL 01 2004 02 710 02 710 24 30 29 246$ 29 2987 29 1020 29 4355 29 2475 29 275 IOC IOC SW 01 2480 01 4435 24 1860 3C 3C UD 22 2455 22 20 22 462$ 3C 3C TOC CRESTVIEW AVE SHORELINE DR SUOARWOOD DR NORTH SHORE DR NORTH SHORE DR MVRTLEWOOD RD FRENCH LAKE RD CASCO POINT RD TOWNLINE RD BAYSIDE RD DUNWOOOY AVE HOLLANDER RD OLD BEACH RD WOLVERTON PL SHADYWOOO RD SHADYWOOD RD CYGNET PL WEST BRANCH RD 92/11/12 OR-004791 92/11/23 OR-004B18 W W 92/11/02 OR 92/11/04 OR 92/11/04 OR 92/11/16 OR 92/11/03 OR 92/11/12 OR 92/11/12 OR 92/11/16 OR 92/11/16 OR 92/11/23 OR 004766 004770 004773 004801 004769 004785 004792 004798 004800 004816 92/11/23 OR-004812 92/1 1/24 OR-004821 92/11/17 OR-004803 92/11/09 OR-004781 92/11/10 OR-004783 92/11/25 OR-004815 38242656 36332561 28663057 24791942 24791942 25410203 24786027 24791942 25370959 24792097 24792097 24749207 24461495 54718151 28697531 14734234 00000000 00000000 STANDARD HTG 4 AC CO FIRESIDE CORNER SOUTHTOWN PLBG DOLDER PLBG & HTG DOLDER PLBG 4 HTG CUSTOM PLBG INC RIDGEDALE PLUMBING COLDER PLBG 4 HTG GADTKE PLUMuINQ NIEMAN PLBG 4 HTG INC NIEMAN PLBG 4 HTG INC GEZEL DENNIS PLBG WIDMER INC PETERSON ELMER J CO BLAYLOCK PLUMBING CO NADEAU LANDSCAPE 4 LAWN NA NASH 00JACOBS• w .00 FIGGE 00WENKSTERN00WENKSTERN00REITZ00DAYTON00HARTZELL00LUNIESKI00WHITE00VICKERMAN006RUER.00 MODRESS .00 OMLIE .00 .00 ENQLUND .00PANUSKA. 00RUCE,00 01 Residence 24 Replacing Existing 02 Addition 25 I.lfting Principal Residence 03 Gf\^qe/Attached 26 Well Abandonment 04 Garaqe/Oetached 27 Foundation Only OS Porch 28 Temporary Trailer 06 Deck 29 Renovate/Remodel 07 Fence 30 Accessory Structure 06 Gazebo 31 Stairway to Lake 09 Pool 32 Retaining Wall 10 Re-side 33 Entrance Monuments 11 Re-roof 34 Tree Removal 17 Tennis CourtnSign 14 Dock 15 Shed U Demo-Prlncl|jal Structure 17 Demo-Accesaory Structure 1 H Hove 19 Conunercial 70 1natitutional 21 Storm Damage Repair 22 1-100 Cubic Yards 23 101 Cubic Yards or More 99 Undef in«* ! 3.630,087.00* WED. DEC 2. 1992, 3:27 PMNUMERICAL LISTING NOVEMBER 1992 PERMIT NBR ISSUED CANCEL ADDR N8R STREET PAGE 1 WORK ID NUMBER COMPANV OWNER LAST NM VALUATION OR-004646 OR-004736 OR-004739 OR-004752 OR-0047S6 OR-004758 OR-0047S9 OR-004761 OR-004762 OR-0O4765 OR-004766 OR-OO4707 OR-004769 OR-004769 OR-004770 OR-004771 OR-004772 0»-004773 -004774 OR-00477S OR-004770 OR-004777 OR-00477S OR-004779 OR-004710 OR-004711 OR-004712 OR-004783 OR-004784 OR-004785 OR-0047S7 OR-004788 OR-0047S9 OR-004700 OR-00479I OR-004792 OR-004793 OR-004794 OR-004799 OR-004796 OR-004797 OR-004791 OR-004100 OR-004801 OR-004802 OR-004803 OR-004805 OR-004806 OR-004407 OR-004808 OR-004809 OR-004810 OR-004811 OR-004812 92/11/03 N 92/11/09 N 92/11/30 N 92/11/02 N 92/11/02 N 92/11/20 N 92/11/03 N 92/11/04 N 92/11/05 N 92/11/02 N 92/11/02 N 92/11/02 N 92/11/05 N 92/11/03 N 92/11/04 N 92/11/04 N 92/11/05 N 92/11/04 Y 92/11/04 N 62/K/05 N 92/11/05 N 92/11/12 N 92/11/06 N 92/11/06 N 92/11/06 N 92/11/09 N 92/11/12 N 92/11/10 N 92/11/12 N 92/11/12 N 92/11/12 N 92/11/12 N 92/11/12 N 92/11/12 N 92/11/12 N 92/11/12 N 92/11/12 N 92/11/13 N 92/11/13 N 92/11/13 N 92/11/20 N 92/11/16 N 92/11/16 N 92/11/16 N 92/11/30 N 92/11/17 N 92/11/18 N 92/11/18 N 92/11/19 N 92/11/19 N 92/11/30 N 92/11/23 N 92/11/30 N 92/11/23 N 2750 KELLEY PKWY 1860 SHADYWOOD RD 2304 SHADYWOOD RD 4435 WOLVERTON PL 1015 ' INDEN LA 1065 3EW0CD HILLS 2475 COUNTRYSIDE DR 275 HOLLANDER RD 2177 SHADYWOOD RD 760 TONKAWA RD 2004 SUGARWOOO OR 1015 LINDEN LA 4330 NORTH SHORE DR 2465 FRENCH LAKE RD 710 NORTH SHORE OR 998 WILOHURST TR 2665 CASCO POINT RD 710 r.ORTH SHORE DR 710 NORTH SHORE DR 2485 DUNWOODY AVE 2465 FRENCH LAKE RD 1140 TONKAWA RD 2480 OLD BEACH RD 1700 SHORELINE DR 325 BROWN RD S 2455 SHADYWOOD RD 2380 ABINGDON WAY 20 CYGNET PL 1020 DOWNLINE RD 2987 CASCO POINT RD 4750 NOR^H SHORE DR 1340 BALDUR PARK RD 1421 NORTH ARM DR 1955 SHORELINE OR 270 CRESTVIEW AVE 1020 TOWNLINE RD 1179 ELMWOOD AVE 3420 SHORELINE OR 3775 TOGO RD 315 TONKAWA RD 2475 DUNWOODY AVE 4355 BAYSIDE RD 2475 DUNWOODY AVE 30 MYRTLEWOOD RD 1655 FOX ST 1860 SHADYWOOD RD 801 TONKAWA RD 4355 BAYSIDE RD 960 TONKAWA RD 3800 WAYZATA BLVD W 2684 LYOIARD AVE 253 CYGNET PL 2480 OLD BEACH RD 2480 OLD BEACH RD W W 20 13327281 01 38256867 15 00000000 01 14736010 29 18253471 29 17291944 05 15429058 02 15443062 06 00000000 01 00000000 01 28663057 01 00000000 06 00000000 29 24786027 02 24791942 01 39414211 06 00000000 02 24791942 24 34432819 03 00000000 24 39296767 02 14730378 29 14746644 29 24738793 24 24738793 22 14734234 02 14425611 22 00000000 29 00000000 29 24791942 24 34461299 11 18238046 11 18693746 19 35595900 29 38242656 29 25370959 15 00000000 19 34718272 24 34718272 01 34830777 29 00000000 29 24792097 29 24792097 24 25410203 01 14750548 24 28697531 29 19390808 01 34987883 16 19372''*" 19 00000 .0 02 18948044 02 14359524 02 17504374 01 24461435 KRAUS ANDERSON CONSTRUCTIO WELTER RAY HTG CO NA HARRIS CONSTRUCTION REAL ESTATE UPDATERS GARDNER & ASSOCIATES VAN HEEL BROS CONSTRUCTION ALL SQUARE INC NA NA SOUTHTOWN PLBG NA NA RIDGEDALE PLUMBING COLDER PLBG & HTG KLEVE HTG & AC NA DOLDER PLBG & HTG NARKIE HTG & AC INC NA VOGT FRED & CO RIGHT ANGLE BUILDING CORP SMITH CONSTRUCTION CO INC CITYVIEW PLBG & HTG CITYVIEW PLBG & HTO NADEAU LANDSCAPE & LAWN JASPER HOMES NA NA DOLDER PLBG & HTG COUNTRYSIDE HTG & COOLING SELA ROOFING WEATHEROUT CO MIDWEST FIREPLACE CO STANDARD HTG & AC CO GADTKE PLUMBING NA B&C HEATING INC B&C HEATING INC LONDON BRICK NA NIEMAN PLBG & HTG INC NIEMAN PI6Q & HTG INC CUSTOM PLBG INC JENSEN HOMES BLAYLOCK PLUMBING 00 PARAGON DESIGNER 8. BLDRS MASTER HTG 8. COOLING STEPHEN LONGMAN BLDRS INC NA CASEY TOMPKINS ORFIELD REMODELING SMITH CONSTRUCTION CO INC WILMER INC OMLIE NISKA SAPA SIMONSON HITE BREUER SHEPHARD BERTELSON FIGGE SAPA STRELOW DAYTON WENKSTERN WAADE DOWNEY WENKSTERN WENKSTERN HICKEY DAYTON KYLE 10DARIS JACOBS BELL ENGLUND CHARLTON PANUSKA LUNIESKI HARTZELL THOMSON ANDREWS VANWRINKLE NASH LUNIESKI GARLOCK KOLLENBERG BENNETT VICKERMAN WHITE VICKERMAN REITZ MACKE OMLIE MOOREwhite CORNELIUS L'ALLIER ST. LAWRENCE MODARES MODRESS 1.366,077.00 .00 1.120.00 195,200.00 1.500.00 45.0 ' 00 15.: 30 56,loj.00 4.000. 00 .00 .00 .00 1.650.00 .00 .00 .00 2.000. 00 .00 .00 25.000. 00 .00 26.000. 00 ; 200.00 00 .00.oc 30.000. 00 .00 23.000. 00 .00 .00 3.490.00 1.700.00 .00 .00 .00 1,000.00 .00 .00 .00 30.000. 00 .00 .00 .00 875.000. 00 .00 180.000. 00 .00 .00 12.000. 00 160.000 00 20,000.00 120,000.00 .00 WED. DEC 2. i992. 3:27 PMNUMERICAL LISTING NOVEMBER 1992 PAGE 2STREET WORK ID NUMBER COMPANYOR-004913 OR-004915 OR-0049IS OR-004917 OR-004919 OR-004919 OR-004920 OR-004921 OR-004923 OR-004924 OR-00492S OR-004927 OR-004929 OR-004929 OR-004930 OR-004931 70C 92/11/23 N 92/11/25 N 92/11/23 N 92/11/23 N 92/11/23 N 92/11/24 N 92/11/24 N 92/11/24 N 92/11/24 N 92/11/24 N 92/11/25 N 92/11/25 N 92/11/25 N 92/11/30 N 92/11/30 N 92/11/30 N 10204625275 645 1700 2535 2475 4435 3185 801 3300 715 275 2304 387 4355 BROWN RO N 29 WEST BRANCH RO 22 HOLLANDER RD 29 TONKAWA RD 24 SHORELINE DR 29 OLD BEACH RD 01 COUNTRYSIDE DR f>2 WOLVERTON PL ai 6TH AVE N Cl TONKAWA RD 24 BAYSIOE RO 01 FERNDALE RD N 24 HOLLANDER RD 02 SHADYWOOO RO 17 ORONO ORCHARD RD S 01 BAYSIDE RO 02 1476840300000000 24749207 39203800 36332561 14203357 38940005 54718151 38693213 39296767 00000000 39296767 34789558 00000000 38666039 36332561 LUCAS DESIGN WORKS NA GEZEL DENNIS PLBG CRONSTROMS HTG A AC INC FIRESIDE CORNER RICHWOOD R C BURNSVILLE HEATING CO PETERSON ELMER J CO MIDLAND HTG A AC INC VOGT FRED A CO NA VOGT FRED A CO DITTER INC NA HAFNER NELSON MASONRY INC FIRESIDE CORNER VALUATIONKIRBYRUCE 6RUER 3.200.00.00 .00 JACOBS KALOW HITE .00 .00 250.000.00 .00 BRANTINGHAM MOORISON LYMAN 8RUER NISKA MACMILLANWHITE . 00 .00 .00 180.000.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 1* «wl «■REPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OF RUN 12/02/92 PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO • * * A t PAGE: 1REQUESTER: CAROLE11/01/92 -RANGE . . . .11/30/92 11/01/9. -RANGE . . . .11/30/91PERMIT TYPE QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW OTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEWUser Defined LAND ALTERATION Sub>totel 3 3*150.00150.00*0.00 0.00*0.00 0.00*0 0*0 00 0.00*0.00 0.00*0.00 0.00* Grand-total 3«*150.00*•O.OO**0.00* *QN*O.OO**0.00**0.00** REPORT NBR. BFEERPT2-1 DATE OF RUN 12/02/92 USER REPORT TOT. . BASE FEE 0.00 0.00 PLAN REVIEW 0.00 0.00 SURCHARGE 0.00 0.00 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 0.00 SAC 0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 0.00 0.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 0.00 0.00 •• PERMIT FEE REPORT •• CITY OF ORONO FROM 11/01/92 TO 11/30/92 PAGE: 1 REQUESTER: CAROLE • < I o J JSUi’lD/Khf... .>IiLjL> rbw ^lwvk-lv> uA'l.,RE^t NtR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OF RUN 12/02/92 PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO PAGE: 1REQUESTER: CAROLE PERMIT TYPE Bulldlna SQL FAHIlY-NEW SF-AOO/REHOOEL SF-ACC STRUCTURE DEHO/PRINCIPAL COft€RCIAL-NEW COM-ADD/REHODEL COH-ACC STRUCTUR INSTITUTION-NEW INST-ADO/REMnOEL INST-ACC STkJCT SF-LAND ALT SF-RENEUAL PERHT PLAN REVIEW ONLY DEHO-ACCESSORY ACC/QARAQES UNDEFINED Sub-total Mechanical HEATING SYSTEMS AIR CONDITIONING WOOD STOVE/FLUE WOOD com/aDd-on FIREPLACE VENTILATION FUEL STORAGE GAS LINE INSPECT DUCT WORK ONLY REMOVE OIL TANK Sub-total Plumbing FIXTURES WATER METER FIRE CODE PERMIT REPLACE METER UNDEFINED Sub-total Sower A Water SEWER CONNECTION WATER CONNECTION NEW SEPTIC SYSTE DRNFLD A/OR TANK Deleted SAC ONLY SEWER DISCONNECT SEWER A WATER UNDEFINED Sub-total Sign PERMANENT/POSTED OTY 24 19S 23 I 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 1 I 3 11 32 0 3 1 6 1 65* -- CURRENT RANGE - 01/01/92 - 11/30/92 BASE FEE 34.323.00 33.985.00 1.793.00 399.SO 797.00 1.238.00 29.00 8.479.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.00 VALUATION 7.910.502.00 4.468.622.00 140.670.00 4.000.00 145.000. 00 176.000. 00 1.200.00 2.541.968.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17 2,007.50 171,350.0000.00 0.00282*83,249.50*15,561,312.00* 82 4,185.00 53.00 13 420.00 5.0G290.00 1.00130.00 0.00381,245.00 10 00 5 150.00 1.00290.00 0.00 10 300.00 3.006180.00 0.00 13 390.00 4.00172*7,060.00*77.00* 95 9,276.00 0.00 12 2,202.00 0.0000.00 0 0010.00 0.00 2 60.00 0.00110*11,538.00*0.00* 240.00 90.00 1.100.00 1,540.00 0.00 0.00 30.00 360.00 30.00 3.390.00* 210.00 0 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 867.00 PLAN REVIEW 22.310.03 18,812 09 1,154.40 0.00 518.05 87.75 18.85 5.511.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.00 0.00 1.285.38 0.00 49.713.24* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00* 00 00 00 00 00 00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 0.00* QTY 9 177 22 10 0 3 4 0 1 1 1 1 0 2 16 1 248* 67 11 5 1 15 2 0 3 10 5 119* 84 7 1 0 0 92* 5 4 9 10 6 1 0 7 0 42* -- PREVIOUS RANGE - 01/01/91 - 11/30/91 BASE FEE 9.357.00 26.034.00 3.979.70 619 SO 0 00 2.003.50 401.00 0.00 362.50 99.00 45.00 99.00 0.00 60.00 1.401.00 150.00 44.611.20* 150.00 390.00 165.00 30 525 60 0 90 300 00 00 00 00 00 00 150.00 860.00* VALUATION 1.927.900.00 2.990.057.00 545.092.00 2.000.00 0.00 457.000 00 32.051.0'' O.OU 41.904.00 7,200.00 2,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 119.050.00 0.00 8,125,253.00* 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0.00 1.00 0.00 13.00* 6 3 0 0 2 1 0 PLAN REVIEW 6,082.08 12,440.26 2.562.12 0.00 0.00 1,237.93 260.65 0.00 0.00 64.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 961.35 0.00 23,608.74* 282.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 282.75* 909.00 0.00 0.00145.00 0.00 0.0030.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.00084.00*0.00*0.00* 150.00 0.00 0.00120.00 0.00 0.00600.00 0.00 0.00385 00 0.00 0.00300.00 0.00 0.00650.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.00390.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.00 595.00*0.00*0.00* 69.00 1,780.00 0.00 PAGE: ^ I REQUESTER: CAROLE__ PREVIOUS RANGE01/01/91 * U/30/91SE FEE57.0034.00 79.70 ;19 .500.00)03.50101.00 0.00362.5099.0045.0099.00 0.0060.00401.00150.00 611.20*150.00 J90.00165.00 30.00525.00 60.00 0.00 90.00 300.00 150.00 860.00* 909.00 145.00 30.00 0.00 0.00 084.00* VALUATION PLAN REVIEW1.927.900.002.990.057.00545.092.00 2.000.000.00457.000 00 32.05U.O''O.OU 41.904.00 7.200.00 2.000.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 U9.050.00 0.006.125.253.00"6.003.000.000.002.001.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 13.00" 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 69.00 6.012.08 12,440.26562.12 0.00 0.00 1.237.93 260.65 0.00 0.00 64.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.00 608.74"282.750.000.000.000.000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 282.75* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 150.00 0.00 n no 0.00 0.00120.00 0 no 0.00600.00 n nn 0.00385 00 n nn 0.00300.00 u, uu n nn 0.00650.00 0.00 0.00 n no 0.00 0.00390.00 n on 0.000.00 2.595.00* u • w 0.00*0.00* 1.780.00 REPORT NBR. BPRHTISS-1 DATE OF RUN 12/02/92PERMITS ISSUED/FEES COLLECTED YEAR-TO-DATE Page 2PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO PAGE: 2REQUESTER: CAROLE-- CURRENT RANGE - 01/01/92 - 11/30/92 -- PREVIOUS RANGE 01/01/91 - 11/30/91PERMIT TYPE QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW OTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEWPER./FREE STANDG 1 30.00 1.000.00 0 00 2 117.00 2.100.00 0.00TEMPORARY4120.00 2,500.00 0 00 2 60.00 0.00 0 00Sub'tot al 12*360.00*7.367.00*0,00*6*246.00*3,880.00*0.00*FiraLAWN SPRINKLER 16 460.00 0.00 0 00 16 • 540.00 0.00 0.00FIRE SPRINKLER 2 1,029.00 210,230.00 668 85 4 343.75 3,600.00 142.60Sub‘total 18*1.509.00*210,230.00*668.85*20*883.75*3.600.00*142.60*Uttr DefinedLAND ALTERATION 22 1,180.00 203.000.00 0 00 17 875.50 2.000.00 0.00TREE REMOVAL 1 30.00 0.00 0.00 2 60.00 0.00 0.00RETAINING WALLS 0 0.00 0.00 0 00 1 35.00 1,500.00 0.00DOCKS00.00 0.00 0.00 1 30.00 750.00 0.00Sub-total 23*1,210.00*203,000.00*0.00*21*1,000.50*4,250.00*0.00*Grand-total 6«2*“.08.336.50**15.981,986.00**50.382.09**548**59.280.45**6,136.990.00**24,034.09** t I'ljt'.ll lo , i.1.1 \h/uv- ro-L>ATh IMtje 3.e-hrDATE OF RUN 12/02/92 *• PERMIT FEE REPORT •* CITY OF ORONO FROM 01/01/92 TO 11/30/92 REPORT NBR. BFEERPT2-1 DATE OF RUN 12/02/92 REPORT TOTAL BASE FEE 108,336.SO PLAN REVIEW SO.382.09 sur:harge 8,018.63 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 SAC 9.100.00 INVESTIGATION 4.284.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 MAIL IN SEWER CONNECTION 161.00 1,821.20 PERMIT TOTAL 182.103.42 •• PERMIT FEE REPORT •• CITY OF ORONO FROM 01/01/92 TO 11/30/92 PAGE: 1REQUESTER: CAROLEBUILDINGMECHANICALPLUMBINGSEWER & WATER USER SIGN FIREBASE FEE 83.249.50 7,080.00 11.538 00 3,390.00 1,210.00 360.00 1,509.00PLAN REVIEW 49.713.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 00 0.00 668.85 SURCHARGE 7,738.01 86.00 48.50 32.00 0.00 1.50 112.62 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 0.00 0 00 0 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SAC 4,900.00 0.00 0.00 4,200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 3.354.00 150.00 0 00 0.00 75.00 30.00 675.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 0 00 O.CO 0.00 0.00 0.00 MAIL IN SEWER CONNECTION 1,821.20 120.50 37 so 3.00 PERMIT TOTAL 150,775.95 7,436.50 11.624.00 7,622.00 1,285.00 391.50 2,968.47 PAGE: 2REQUESTER: CAROLE .'•ZONING PERMITS ISSUED/FEES COLLECTED YEAR-TO-DATEREPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OF RUN 12/02/82PERMIT TYPEUser Dtflned SUBDIVISION VARIANCE CUP SKETCH PLAN VARIANCE/CUP VACATION REZONINO APPEAL Sub-total Qrand-total QTY1539 192 1 00 076* 78»* • PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO-- CURRENT RANGE - 01/01/92 - 11/30/92BASE FEE5.910.007.125.00 2.700.00 200.00 175.00 0.000.00 0.0016.110.00* 16.110.00** PAGE: 1REQUESTER; CAROLE-- PREVIOUS RANGE - 01/01/91 - 11/30/91VALUATIONPLAN REVIEW QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW0.00 0 00 11 3.430.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 52 8.725.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 10 1.700.00 0.00 0 000.00 0.00 4 750.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 2 175.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 2 425.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 1 175.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 5 150.00 0.00 0.000.00*0 00*87*15,530.00*0.00*0.00* 0.00**0.00**87**15.530.00**o.oo**0.00* REPORT NBR. BFEERPT2-1 DATE OF RUN 12/02/92 BASE FEE USER 16.110.00 REPORT TOTAL 16.110.00 PLAN REVIEW 0.00 0.00 SURCHARGE 0.00 0.00 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 0.00 SAC <0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 200.00 200.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 16.310.00 16.310.00 •• PERMIT FEE REPORT *• CITY OF ORONO FROM 01/01/92 TO 11/30/92 PAGE: 1REQUESTER; CAROLE 1992 RECAP OP CONTRACT CITIESJanuaryFabruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSaptenber October Novambar Dacambar YTO TotalsSprin9 ParkPlan Paviaw 163.80 415.68 0.00 53.95 B2S.18 89.00 140.45 119.15 1,360.25 83.50 102.37 3,353.33Znapaationa120.00 30.00 180.00 120.00 60.00 105.00 120.00 75.00 120.00 180.00 255.00 1,365.00Patainar25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 75,00 25.00 25.00 275.OCTOTAL306.80 470.68 205.00 190.95 910.18 219.00 285.45 219.15 1,5 ..25 288.30 382.37 4,993.33No of Pin lav 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 3 No. of Znapac 8 2 12 6 4 7 8 5 8 12 17 91 Ninnatonka Baach Plan Paaiaw 0.00 0.00 0.00 650.9?0.00 444.90 1.497.28 0.00 1,370.75 665.93 1,169.36 5,799.15 Znapaotiona 30.00 75.00 0.00 30.00 60.00 60.00 120.00 60.00 120.00 165.00 150.00 870.00 Natainar 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 275.00 TOTAL 55.00 100.00 25.00 705.93 85.00 529.90 1.642.28 85.00 1,515.75 855.93 1,344.36 6,944.15 No. of Pin Na 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No. of Znapao 2 5 0 2 4 4 8 4 8 11 10 58 ••1ii11i•1••1•s1■•11•111••■•11■•1■•111111••111•111•1•1•mmmmmmmmu •mmmmmmmmmm OVtNALL TOTAL 363.80 570.68 230.00 904.88 995.18 748.90 1927.73 304.15 3021.00 1144.43 1726.73 0.00 11937.48 SEE OVERSIZE DOCUMENT(S) ' ' 'K h; ■ \ f mArnm Sr £ ,W ^'"'’ tir M !%1s Dm «m* cImcM w lln» /‘T «tr *1 / •«■ M«/ ^ - I* . »v wi t» rUm^^ to) W *»«« It »M*r a, ii«.(<i*aa laJ^^ KMOILi • MAMO*.f cvwaT '\ m ■•*«•<••« ••MBVIVMI* .••••••••■•TBi •!•«>««• ” ------------- J 811—* —y 's____^___________/ iOOIT»<M MB «U«MO LAirff MMMrrONICA oaoMD.MroM t.M.1 mOJiCT NO.BOMt OBB ...'¥■ 'y-MM,-r; t :i SEE OVERSIZE DOCUMENT(S) 4 ■ 9t 9CHOELL ■ MADSON, INC^^ CllE<t N /LOCATIOM ■\ OAV/0 CABL90M CO. aiS ISLAND LANS MINNCTONKA V OaONO, MINN./ S.M.I. PROJECT N0.6DSa» OC3 ..